The High Court
Case Details
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK W.P.(C) No.1546,1612,1613,1615,1616,1617 & 1618 of 2025 Bijaya Kumar Biswal …. Petitioner Mr. D.N. Rath, Advocate -versus- State of Odisha & Another …. Opposite Parties Mr. S.K. Jee, AGA Mr. S. Palit, Sr. Adv. along with Ms. A. Kejriwal, (for O.P. No.2-University) CORAM: THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE BIRAJA PRASANNA SATAPATHY ORDER 28.01.2025 Order No. 03. 1. This matter is taken up through Hybrid Arrangement (Virtual/Physical) Mode.
Legal Reasoning
2. Heard Mr. D.N. Rath learned counsel appearing for the petitioners and Mr. S. Palit learned Sr. Counsel appearing for the University-Opp. Party No.2. 3. All the present batch of Writ Petitions have been filed inter alia with similar prayer, which reads as follows:- that “Under the above circumstance, it is therefore humbly prayed this Hon’ble Court may be graciously pleased to issue a writ in the nature of writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, direction or order by quashing the 340/OUTR/2024 advertisement No. dated 12.02.2024 under Annexure-6, so far as it relates to the post of Assistant Professor in Computer Science & Application (MCA). // 2 // And this Hon’ble Court be further pleased to direct the opposite parties to allow the petitioner to continue as the faculty member against the post of Assistant Professor in Computer Science & Application (MCA) under opposite party no.2 as usual and to take step for his regularisation since in the meantime he has already completed more than 5 years of service”. 4. It is contended that all the petitioners were engaged on temporary basis with consolidated monthly remuneration by facing due selection process. But on the face of such engagement and continuance, the impugned advertisement has been issued by the Opp. Party No.2 on 12.2.2024 to fill up the posts on regular basis and without considering the claim of the petitioners for regularization of their services. 4.1 Learned counsel appearing for the petitioners contended that since petitioners by facing due recruitment process so initiated by the University got the benefit of engagement as against different posts, there was no occasion to go for fresh recruitment to fill up the post in question by issuing the impugned advertisement. 4.2 It is also contended that in similar issue, this Court when passed orders in favour of similarly situated petitioners, the matter was carried by the University to the Apex Court after becoming unsuccessful in Writ Appeal in SLP (Civil) Appeal No. 15791 of 2023 and similar SLPs. Page 2 of 6 // 3 // 4.3 It is contended that Hon’ble Apex Court has passed the following interim order on 03.05.2024 in the aforesaid batch of appeals. xxx xxx xxx to the interlocutory “Counter applications have been filed wherein it is stated that by way of recruitment process required to be completed in to advertisement dated furtherance 13.03.2024 and 12.02.2024, the right of the respondents would not be adversely affected. therefore, respondents, In any case, the direction as issued by the impugned order is in favour of the the interregnum, we direct that the process of selection may go on by the said process but it shall not be finalised without leave of this Court and the selected candidates would not acquire equity until directed by the Court. in The interlocutory applications are
Decision
disposed of. Xxx xxx xxx 4.4 It is contended that in view of the interim order, the University has now been restrained to fill up the posts in terms of the impugned advertisement dated 12.02.2024. It is accordingly contended that the petitioners be allowed to continue till disposal of the matters by the Hon’ble Apex Court and appropriate direction be issued to the University to regularise them in their services, subject to the final order to be passed by the Apex Court. Page 3 of 6 // 4 // 5. Mr. S. Palit, learned Sr. Counsel appearing for the University on the other hand contended that petitioners are not similarly situated as like the petitioners whose claim was allowed by this Court and the issue is pending before the Hon’ble Apex Court in the aforesaid batch of appeals. 5.1 it is contended that all the petitioners have rendered less than five years of service, save and except the petitioner in W.P.(C) No. 15046 of 2025. While Petitioner in W.P.(C) No. 1612 of 2025 has rendered services for around 1 year 5 month, Petitioner in W.P.(C) No.1613 of 2025 has got 1 year 9 months; Petitioner in W.P.(C) No. 1615 of 2025, 1 year 9 months; Petitioner in W.P.(C) No.1616 of 2025 3 year 10 months; Petitioner in W.P.(C) 1617 of 2025 2 years 7 months and Petitioner in W.P.(C) 1618 of 2025 1 year 5 months. 5.2 It is accordingly contended that since the Petitioner in all these batch of Writ Petitions save and except the Petitioner in W.P.(C) No.15046 of 2025 have continued for less than 2 years in 4 number of cases and for less than 3 years in 1 case and less than 4 years in one case, they are not eligible to get their services regularized. Similarly, Petitioner No.1 since has rendered little above 5 years of services, he is also not eligible to get the benefit of regularization. 5.3 It is also contended that even though petitioners were engaged on temporary basis with consolidated remuneration basing on the earlier recruitment process initiated by the University, but they are not developing their skill to continue with their services, which is a basic requirement. It is also Page 4 of 6 // 5 // contended that by facing walk-in interview, Petitioners were all engaged on temporary basis and it gives no right to claim for regularization. 5.4 It is accordingly that since the petitioners are not similarly situated as like the other batch of petitioners whose claim was allowed by this Court and so confirmed in Writ Appeal, the prayer as made in the Writ Petition to regularise them in their services is not at all entertainable. 5.5 However, learned Sr. Counsel appearing for the petitioners does not dispute the interim order passed by the Apex Court wherein the university has ben restrained to fill up the posts in terms of the impugned advertisement dated 12.02.2024 and 13.03.2024. 6. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and considering the submission made this courts finds that the present Petitioners were engaged on temporary basis with consolidated remuneration, in terms of the earlier recruitment process initiated by the University in the shape of Walk in Interview. The impugned advertisement has been issued on 12.02.2024 and 13.03.2024 to fill up those posts on regular basis. Therefore, taking into account the period of service rendered by the petitioner, this court is not inclined to allow the prayer, so far as it relates to regularisation of their services. The prayer made in that regard is hereby rejected. 6.1. However, taking into account the nature of interim order passed by the Apex Court on 03.05.2024, it is the view of this Page 5 of 6 // 6 // court that in view of the said interim order the University is not in a position to fill up the posts on regular basis in terms of the advertisement issued on dated 12.02.2024 as well as 13.03.2024. 6.2. Therefore, this court is of the view that petitioners be allowed to continue till the matter is finally decided by the Apex Court with passing of the final order or any further order that may be passed modifying the interim order passed on 03.05.2024. However, the continuance of the petitioners in term of this order shall not give them any right to claim for regularisation and they will be guided by the order to be passed by the Apex Court either final or interim. All the Writ Petitions are accordingly disposed of. Photocopy of the order be placed in the connected cases. (Biraja Prasanna Satapathy) Judge sangita Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed Signed by: SANGITA PATRA Reason: authentication of order Location: high court of orissa, cuttack Date: 31-Jan-2025 18:01:41 Page 6 of 6