The High Court
Case Details
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK W.P.(C). No. 19996 of 2019 (An Application under Articles 226 & 227 of the Constitution of India) Chittaranjan Mallick ...… Petitioner --------------- -Versus- State of Odisha and Others _____________________________________________ .... Opposite Parties For Petitioner : Mr. M. Mohapatra, Advocate, For Opp. Party : Mr. S.N.Pattnaik, Additional Government Advocate for the State. Mr. N. Samal, Advocate for Opp. Party No. 5 _______________________________________________________ CORAM: JUSTICE SASHIKANTA MISHRA JUDGMENT 28th March, 2025 SASHIKANTA MISHRA, J. The petitioner has approached this Court with the following prayer; “It is prayed therefore, that this Hon’ble Court may graciously be pleased to a) Admit the writ application: b) Call for the records c) Issue Rule Nisi in calling upon the opposite parties as to why the order of disengagement dated 09.01.2018 passed by the Collector-cum-DPC (MGNREGS), Jajpur Page 1 of 10 under Annexure 5 shall not be quashed and the petitioner shall not be allowed to perform his duty of Gram Rojgar Sevak (GRS) of Arthanga Gram Panchayat, d) If the opp.parties fails to show cause or shown insufficient cause the said rule be made absolute And pass any other order(s), direction(s) as this Hon’ble Court deem fit and proper And for this Act of kindness the petitioner shall as in duty bound ever pray.” 2. The facts of the case are that an advertisement was issued by the Collector, Jajpur inviting applications for engagement of Gram Rojgar Sevak of different Gram Panchayats under Rasulpur block. The petitioner was one of the applicants and was selected as per the select list published on 10.12.2007. He was thereafter appointed pursuant to letter of engagement issued by the Sarpanch, Arthanga Gram Panchayat on the same day. 3. The Project Director, DRDA vide letter dated 26.07.2016 issued a show cause notice to the petitioner basing on the allegation of one Satyabrata Sarat Kumar Das, Advocate to the effect that he has obtained NOC for construction of LPG godown for LPG dealership by providing funds and documents to the HPCL authorities. The petitioner submitted his reply on 09.08.2016 inter Page 2 of 10 alia stating that the complainant bore a grudge against him which prompted him to lodge the complaint. On merits, it was stated that his family was exploring the opportunity for venturing into cooking gas business reserved for scheduled caste category. Further, the District Magistrate after following the procedure of law had granted No Objection Certificate in favour of his family concerned, which is a Hindu undivided family business and his wife also lent support financially to him. The complainant, having failed to obtain the LPG Gas dealership of his client Sebati Soren, had filed the complaint out of grudge. The petitioner’s family had therefore, filed a defamation case against the complainant. 4. The Collector, Jajpur by order dated 09.01.2018 disengaged the petitioner from the post of GRS w.e.f. 04.01.2018 on the ground of being unlawfully engaged by giving false and fabricated documents to HPCL for construction of LPG godown for LPG business at Jajpur Road area. Page 3 of 10 5. Being aggrieved, the petitioner has filed this writ application with the prayer as quoted above. 6. Counter affidavit has been filed by the BDO on behalf of the Opposite Parties. It is stated that a complaint was received against the petitioner for having taken dealership of LPG gas while working as GRS. He was found to be dealing in LPG Gas. As such, he was disengaged. Moreover, because of his engagement in gas agency his performance in Aadhaar seeding, job card verification under MGNREGA, Geo tagging and house completion under Rural Housing Scheme is very poor for which, he was directed to show cause on number of occasions. It is also stated that the petitioner ought to have filed appeal before the Director, Special Projects as per the comprehensive guidelines dated 06.04.2018.
Legal Reasoning
7. Heard Mr. M. Mohapatra, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. S.N.Pattnaik, learned Additional Government Advocate for the State. Page 4 of 10 8. Mr. Mohapatra would submit that the engagement of the petitioner as GRS is purely temporary and on contract basis subject to renewal from time to time. Moreover, said engagement was subject to submission of an undertaking that he would not claim regular employment under the Government. As such, there is no employment or any employer-employee relationship between the Government and the petitioner so as to create a bar for him to seek other avenues of employment submitted against him. 9. Mr. Pattnaik, learned State counsel on the other hand would submit that the nature of work of GRS is that his full attention and participation is necessary. In the event, the person concerned is engaged in other activities, his work as GRS would naturally suffer, which is what has happened in the present case. According to Mr. Pattnaik, therefore, the petitioner was rightly disengaged. Page 5 of 10 10. The facts of the case as narrated are not disputed. A show cause notice was issued on 26.07.2016 by the PD, DRDA, specifically asking the petitioner to show cause notice with regard to obtaining NOC for construction of LPG Godown for LPG dealership providing false and fabricated documents to the HPCL authorities. Be it noted that what false and fabricated documents were allegedly submitted by the petitioner is not clarified in the show cause notice. Be that as it may, the petitioner submitted his reply on 09.08.2016 clearly stating his position and admitting the fact of obtaining NOC. The impugned order dated 09.01.2018 passed by the Project Director simply states that the petitioner is disengaged on the ground of being unlawfully engaged in trade by giving false and fabricated document to HPCL. Again, on bare reading of the impugned order, it is evident that firstly, what false and fabricated documents were allegedly submitted by the petitioner to HPCL authority has not been mentioned at all and secondly, whether the reply Page 6 of 10 submitted by the petitioner to the show cause notice was considered or not, has also not been stated. 11. As regards the stand taken by the State in its counter that the remedy of appeal is available, this Court finds that such contention is based on the comprehensive guidelines issued by the PR and DW department on 06.04.2018. The order of disengagement was passed prior to issuance of the said guidelines. The stand taken by the State is therefore, not tenable. 12. Further, the petitioner does not appear to have been granted any opportunity of personal hearing. The order of disengagement is unsustainable on the above count alone. 13. However, considering the specific stand taken by the State that having been engaged as GRS, the petitioner could not have been involved in any other trade, this Court, during hearing of the case directed the State counsel to satisfy the Court as regards any bar in law Page 7 of 10 for a GRS to be engaged in any other activity simultaneously. Pursuant to such direction, an additional affidavit was filed enclosing sample copies of the engagement order of GRS, the proforma of undertaking and the prevalent guidelines. From the sample copies of the undertaking, which forms part of the engagement order and a copy of which has been enclosed as Annexure-D/4, it is seen that every person engaged as GRS was required to submit the following undertaking. "I am quite aware that the engagement offered is purely temporary and for a specific purpose of executing the work under MGNREGA and this is not a permanent job. Hence, I solemnly affirm that I would not claim my permanent absorption job under State Government/ Zilla Parishad/Panchayat Samities/ Gram Panchayats etc. Further, I undertake not to approach any Court of Law for engaging me on permanent basis under the State Government or any other organization merely on the ground of my engagement as Gram Rozgar Sevak.” in The Two things are apparent. Firstly, the work of GRS is not permanent and for the specific purpose of executing work under MRNEGA. Secondly, the engagement is subject to the condition that he would not claim permanent absorption in any job under State Government/Gram Panchayat/Panchayat Samiti/Zilla Parishad etc. There is no other condition debarring him Page 8 of 10 from taking up any other avocation in the undertaking. Thus, while the State makes it clear that there is no employee or employer relationship between it and a person appointed as GRS yet, at the same time, it takes the rather unconscionable stand that a person so engaged cannot seek any other avocation at the same time. It would be worthwhile at this stage to refer to Article 19 (1)(g) of the Constitution of India which reads as follows: “19. (1) All citizens shall have the right— g) to practise any profession, or to carry on any occupation, trade or business.” By imposing such restrictions as in the present case, it is obvious that the fundamental right guaranteed under Article 19(1)(g) would be violated, which obviously cannot be countenanced in law. 14. From a conspectus of the analysis of facts, law and the contentions raised, this Court is left with no doubt that the impugned order cannot be sustained in the eye of law as it seeks to impose unreasonable restrictions on the fundamental right of the petitioner guaranteed under Article 19 (1) (g) of the Constitution of India. Even Page 9 of 10 otherwise, the impugned order, for the reasons indicated before, cannot be sustained in the eye of law. 15. For the foregoing reasons therefore, the writ application is allowed, the impugned order dated 09.01.2018 is hereby quashed. The Opposite Party authorities are directed to reinstate the petitioner as GRS forthwith. It is made clear that the petitioner shall not be entitled to any financial benefit for the period of disengagement but said period shall be notionally counted for the purpose of continuity of his engagement. ……..………………….. Sashikanta Mishra, Judge Deepak Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed Signed by: DEEPAK PARIDA Reason: Authentication Location: OHC,Cuttack Date: 04-Apr-2025 12:54:58 Page 10 of 10