Sachidananda Nayak vs State Of Odisha & Anr on 12 March, 2026

Author: Biraja Prasanna Satapathy

Bench: Biraja Prasanna Satapathy

          IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK
                        W.P.(C) No.17007 of 2024

        Sachidananda Nayak               ....                     Petitioner
                                                      Mr. S. Behera, Advocate

                                      -versus-
        State of Odisha & Anr.
                                         ....             Opposite Parties
                                                             Mr. S. Das, ASC


                            CORAM:
               JUSTICE BIRAJA PRASANNA SATAPATHY
                                        ORDER

12.03.2026 Order No.

02. 1. This matter is taken up through Hybrid Arrangement (Virtual/Physical) Mode.

2. Heard learned counsel appearing for the Parties.

3. The present Writ Petition has been filed inter alia challenging the rejection of the Petitioner's claim to get the benefit of regularization vide order dtd.10.08.2021 under Annexure-12 so passed by Opposite Party No.1.

4. While assailing the impugned order, learned counsel appearing for the Petitioner contended that Petitioner was engaged as a casual helper in the establishment of Opposite Party No.2 on 27.01.1988 and such engagement of the Petitioner was also reflected in the final gradation list /Seniority List of casual helper / Daily wage labourer published by Opposite Party No.2 under Annexure-4.

// 2 //

4.1. It is also contended that Petitioner in the said final gradation list issued under Annexure-4 was placed at SL. No.1.

4.2. It is however contended that even though Petitioner was engaged as a casual helper w.e.f. 27.01.1988 and he was placed at SL. No.1 of the final gradation list published under Annexure-4, but ignoring his claim, juniors placed from SL. No.5 onwards were regularized by the self-same Opposite Party No.2 vide office order dtd.12.03.2024 under Annexure-13.

4.3. Taking this Court to Annexure-13, learned counsel appearing for the Petitioner contended that, person placed at SL. Nos.1 of order dtd.12.03.2024, was placed at SL. No.5 in the final gradation list published under Annexure-4. Similarly, person placed at SL. No.3 in the order under Annexure-13, was placed at SL. No.6, in the final gradation list under Annexure-4.

5. Making all the submissions, learned counsel appearing for the Petitioner contended that, since persons placed below the Petitioner in the final gradation list published under Annexure-4, admittedly have been regularized vide order dtd. 12.03.2024 under Annexure-13 so issued by Opposite Party No.2, Petitioner's claim could not have been rejected on the

// 3 //

ground indicated in the impugned order dtd.10.08.2021 under Annexure-12.

5.1. It is accordingly contended that Petitioner is eligible and entitled to get similar benefit of regularization as has been extended in favour of the persons placed at SL. Nos.5 and 6 of Annexure-4 vide order dtd.12.03.2024 under Annexure-13, with quashing of the impugned order dtd.10.08.2021.

6. Learned Addl. Standing Counsel for the State on the other hand made his submission basing on the stand taken in Para-9 and 10 of the counter affidavit and the same reads as follows:-

"9. That, in reply to the averments made in Para-7 to 13 of the writ petition it is humbly submitted that, the Petitioner was engaged as Casual Helper in the Secretariat Branch Press, Bhubaneswar with effect from 27.01.1988 to 06.07.1990 on daily wages basis. Subsequently, he was retrenched from engagement with effect from 07.07.1990. The petitioner approached the Learned Labour Court, Bhubaneswar vide I.D. Case No. 91/1992. The Learned Labour Court set aside the retrenchment order of the Director, PS&P. Subsequently. the management challenged the order of Labour Court before the Hon'ble High Court of Orissa vide OJC No. 18254 of 1997 and also the Petitioner filed OJC No. 13117/1997. The Hon'ble High Court of Orissa vide their order dated 16.01.2002 passed in OJC No. 18254 of 1997 and OJC No. 13117/1997 confirmed the said award dated 12.02.1997 of Learned Labour Court and passed order to re-instate the Petitioner with payment of back wages.

That, the Petitioner was re-instated in service on 02.07.2002 and is continuing to work as Casual Helper on daily wages basis as per Order dated 16.01.2002 of the Hon'ble High Court of Orissa

// 4 //

passed in OJC No. 13117 of 1997 and OJC No. 18254 of 1997. That, during the year 1994, the then Director of Printing, Stationery & was Publication, Odisha had given regular appointment to the 105 Casual workmen as Helper (Industrial) in the regular scale of pay against the sanctioned posts of 40. The appointment of the said Casual workmen subsequently declared as illegal by the Learned OAT in Ο.Λ. Νο. 872(C)/1994. The said illegally appointed Helpers continued in service as per interim orders of the Hon'ble High Court of Orissa passed in WPC (OAC) No. 1378 of 1994 and W.P.(C) No.329/2012. In this connection it is pertinent to mention here that the present Petitioner was disengaged in service with effect from 07.07.1990 and he was re-instated as casual worker with effect from 02.07.2002 as per Order dated 16.01.2002 of the Hon'ble High Court of Orissa passed in OJC No. 13117 of 1997 and OJC No. 18254 of 1997. That from the above, it is clear that the Petitioner was not working in the Directorate during the year 1994 when his juniors were illegally regularized as Helper.

10. That, in reply to the averments made in Para-14 to 15 of the writ petition it is humbly submitted that, the Hon'ble Apex Court vide their judgment passed in State of Karnataka Vrs Uma Devi and Amarkanti Ray and M. L. Keshari case have observed that the case of a Casual workman can be considered for regularization if he was engaged against a sanctioned post for more than 10 years without any protective order of the Court. In the instant case the Petitioner was not engaged against any sanction post. Further he was continuing in the Directorate as order dated 16.01.2002 of the Hon'ble High Orissa passed in OJC No. 13117 of 1997 and OJC No. 18254 of 1997. As such the Petitioner is not coming under the purview of the judgment of the Hon'ble Apex Court passed in State of Karnataka Vrs Uma Devi and Amarkanti Ray and M.L. Keshari case."

6.1. It is contended that Petitioner while continuing w.e.f. 27.01.1988, he was retrenched w.e.f. 07.07.1990. Petitioner accordingly moved the learned Labour Court in I.D. Case No.91/92 and learned Labour Court when passed an award directing reinstatement of the

// 5 //

Petitioner with 50% back wages vide award dtd.12.02.1997 under Annexure-1, challenging the same a writ petition was filed before this Court in OJC No.18254 of 1997. Petitioner also claiming full back wages moved this Court by filing OJC No.13117 of 1997.

6.2. However, both the Writ Petitions when were dismissed vide order dtd.16.01.2002, Petitioner was re- engaged as a casual labour vide order dtd.02.07.2002 under Annexure-B/2. Since Petitioner remained out of employment for the period from 07.07.1990 to 02.07.2002, Petitioner cannot be equated with the persons placed below him in the final gradation list published under Annexure-4 and accordingly not entitled to get the benefit of regularization, so extended in favour of the persons placed below the Petitioner in Annexure-4, vide order dtd.12.03.2024 under Annexure-13.

6.3. It is also contended that since Petitioner never raised a claim to get the benefit of regularization, the same was rejected when this Court directed for its consideration in W.P.(C) No.31926 of 2020.

7. Having heard learned counsel appearing for the Parties and considering the submissions made, this Court finds that Petitioner was engaged as casual labour in the establishment of Opposite Party No.2 on

// 6 //

27.01.1988. Such date of engagement of the Petitioner is also admitted in the final gradation list published under Annexure-4. However, while so continuing, Petitioner when was disengaged w.e.f. 07.07.1990, the matter was carried to the labour Court in I.D. Case No.91/92.

7.1. Learned Labour Court vide its award dtd.12.02.1997 under Annexure-1 when directed for reinstatement of the Petitioner by treating the retrenchment as illegal with payment of 50 % back wages, challenging such order of reinstatement as well as the back wages, State moved this Court by filing OJC No.18254 of 1997. Petitioner also filed OJC No.13117 of 1997, claiming full back wages for the period he remained out of employment. After dismissal of both the Writ Petitions by this Court vide order dtd.16.01.2002, Petitioner was reengaged as a casual labour vide order dtd.02.07.2002 under Annexure-B/2.

7.2. Since the disengagement of the Petitioner w.e.f. 07.07.1990 was held as illegal by the learned Labour Court in its award under Annexure-1 and with a direction to pay 50% back wages, which was confirmed by this Court in its order dtd.16.01.2002, it is the view of this Court that Petitioner remained in employment all through and there is no break in service.

// 7 //

7.3. Taking into account the nature of award passed by the learned Labour Court, so confirmed by this Court and the fact that Petitioner is continuing as a casual labour w.e.f. 27.01.1988 and junior placed below him have got the benefit of regularization vide order dtd.12.03.2024 under Annexure-13, which is not disputed, this Court is inclined to quash the rejection of the Petitioner's claim to get the benefit of regularization so passed by Opposite Party No.1 vide order dtd.10.08.2021 under Annexure-12.

7.4. While quashing the order dtd.10.08.2021 under Annexure-12, this Court directs Opposite Party No.2 to pass an appropriate order regularizing the services of the Petitioner from the date persons similarly situated and placed below him were regularized vide order dtd.12.03.2024 under Annexure-13, with extension of all service & financial benefits. This Court directs Opposite Party No.2 to pass a fresh order as directed within a period of six (6) weeks from the date of receipt of this order.

8. Accordingly, the Writ Petition stands disposed of.

(Biraja Prasanna Satapathy) Subrat Judge

Location: HIGH COURT OF ORISSA, CUTTACK