The High Court
Case Details
Order No. 09. IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK W.P.(C) No. 6097 of 2022 Niladri Bhusan Patra …. Petitioner Mr. Banshidhar Satapathy, Advocate -versus- State of Odisha and others …. Opposite Parties Mr. P.C. Das, ASC CORAM: JUSTICE A.K.MOHAPATRA
Decision
ORDER 18.04.2023 1. This matter is taken up through Hybrid Arrangement (Virtual/Physical Mode). 2. Heard learned counsel for the Petitioner and learned Additional Standing Counsel appearing for the State-Opposite Parties. Perused the writ petition as well as the documents annexed thereto. 3. The present writ petition has been filed by the Petitioner with a prayer to quash the impugned order No.14003 dated 30.10.2009 under Annexure-1 and commanding the Opposite Parties to regularize the service of the Petitioner from the date similarly situated employees were brought over to the work charged establishment and subsequently regularized with continuity of service and financial benefits. 4. Learned counsel for the Petitioner, at the outset, submitted that initially the Petitioner was engaged on 15.11.1988 as a NMR employee and discharging his duties as a // 2 // Time Keeper. After completion of 13 years of service as a NMR, the Petitioner along with 73 other persons approached the Odisha Administrative Tribunal by filing O.A. No.2041(C)/2001 claiming regularization of their service. It is further submitted that in the year 2009, the said O.A. was disposed of by granting liberty to the applicants including Petitioner to approach the authorities for redressal of their grievance. 5. Learned counsel for the Petitioner further submitted that while the matter was pending before the Tribunal, 57 NMR employees were retrenched w.e.f. 30.11.2001 on the ground that they were found surplus which was challenged before this Court by filing O.J.C. No.17554 of 2001. During pendency of the above noted writ petition, the Petitioner along with others were brought over to the work charged establishment. Accordingly, the Petitioner has withdrawn the writ petition which was permitted by this Court vide order dated 29.7.2009. 6. Learned counsel for the Petitioner further submitted that vide Office Order dated 31.8.2009 under Annexure-11, the present Petitioner along with others were brought over to the work charged establishment w.e.f. 1.3.2009 subject to certain terms and conditions as indicated in the letter dated 31.08.2009. Finally, the Petitioner has filed the present writ petition with a prayer for regularization of his service in the regular establishment. Page 2 of 5 // 3 // 7. It is further submitted by the learned counsel for the Petitioner that pursuant to the condition in the said order, i.e., bringing the Petitioner over to the work charged establishment, the Petitioner has withdrawn the writ petition. Thereafter, the authorities vide order dated 30.10.2009 under Annexure-1 revoked the order dated 31.08.2009 bringing over the NMR employees to the work charged establishment. The said order dated 30.10.2009 was challenged before the Tribunal by filing O.A. No.2719(C)/2009. The Tribunal vide order dated 05.11.2009, as an interim, stayed the operation of order under Annexure-11, i.e., the order dated 30.10.2009 under Annexure-1 to the present writ petition. 8. The above noted O.A. filed by the Petitioner was transferred to this Court after abolition of the Tribunal and was renumbered as WPC(OAC) No.2719 of 2009. Learned counsel for the Petitioner further contended that vide order dated 19.01.2022, a coordinate Bench of this Court disposed of the writ petition on the ground of non-prosecution. However, liberty was granted to the Petitioner to approach the appropriate forum in case the cause of action still survives. Accordingly, the present writ petition has been filed before this Court. 9. Learned Additional Standing Counsel appearing for the State-Opposite Parties, on the other hand, submitted that during the pendency of the present writ petition, the authorities have passed an order taking over the Petitioner to the regular establishment vide order dated 06.02.2023. He further Page 3 of 5 // 4 // contended that the name of the Petitioner appears against Serial No.940 and was absorbed against a post of Mate under the SE, Mahanadi Barage Division Cuttack with the Pay Matrix fixed under the ORSP Rules, 2017 in Level-1, Cell-1. In such view of the matter, learned Additional Standing Counsel submitted that since the Petitioner has been brought over to the regular establishment, the present writ petition has become infructuous. 10. Learned Additional Standing Counsel further contended that the regularization order dated 06.02.2023 under Annexure-A to the Interlocutory Application filed by the Petitioner reveals that the authorities have inserted a condition, i.e., Condition No.1 wherein it has been stated that the employees who have filed contempt petition alleging non- compliance of the Court’s Order shall not be allowed to join until withdrawal order of such case/contempt is produced before the said office. Accordingly, it is also submitted that in view of the pendency of the present writ petition, the Petitioner will not be allowed to join pursuant to the order dated 06.02.2023. 11. Considering the submissions made by the learned counsel for the Petitioner as well as learned Additional Standing Counsel appearing for the State-Opposite Parties and upon a careful consideration of the background facts involved in the present writ petition, this Court is of the considered view that the authorities have already regularized the service of the Petitioner by bringing them over to the regular establishment against the vacant/regular post of Mate as has been indicated in Page 4 of 5 // 5 // the order dated 06.02.2023 under Annexure-A to the Interlocutory Application filed by the Petitioner. However, the condition imposed in the said letter to the effect that the Petitioner will not allowed to join unless the Petitioner produced an order showing that the case/contempt has been withdrawn by him. 12. Taking into consideration such development and further keeping in view the fact that the Petitioner has already been regularized vide order dated 06.02.2023, the present writ petition is being disposed of, as nothing remains to be adjudicated after order dated 06.02.2023. Therefore, the Petitioner is directed to join pursuant to order dated 06.02.2023 along with certified copy of this order and in the event the Petitioner submits his joining report, authorities are directed to accept the same and also allow the Petitioner to join against the regular post in which he has already been absorbed. Further, this Court grants liberty to the Petitioner to approach the appropriate forum for redressal of any surviving grievance, which according to the Petitioner, has remained unaddressed by the Opposite Parties. 13. With the aforesaid observation and direction, this writ petition stands disposed of. Debasis (A.K. Mohapatra) Judge Page 5 of 5