The High Court
Case Details
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK W.P.(C) No.28613 of 2021 Dibyajyoti Das …. Petitioner Mr. S.K. Das, Advocate State of Odisha and Others -versus- …. Opposite Parties Mr. M.R. Mohanty, AGA Mr. S.K. Nath, Advocate for O.P. No.3 CORAM: JUSTICE BIRAJA PRASANNA SATAPATHY Order No. ORDER 31.07.2025 06. 1. This matter is taken up through Hybrid Arrangement (Virtual/Physical) Mode.
Legal Reasoning
2. Heard learned counsel for the parties. 3. The present Writ Petition has been filed inter alia with the following prayer:- of the
Decision
order to quash “Under the above circumstances, it is therefore humbly prayed that the Hon’ble Court be graciously termination pleased dtd.31.05.1995 or declare it to be invalid and further be pleased to direct the Opposite Parties to regularize the service of the petitioner from his initial date of joining and that has been done in case of other and to grant him all consequential service and financial benefits including promotions to the next higher ranks as it has been extended to the similarly situated persons from time to time.” // 2 // 4. It is contended that vide order dated 22.01.1992 under Annexure-2, petitioner was appointed as Assistant Engineer (Mechanical) in the NMR establishment of Odisha Construction Corporation Limited (In short “Corporation”) on daily wage basis. 4.1. It is contended that while so continuing, petitioner along with so many similarly situated daily wage employees, when were terminated vide order dated 26.05.1995, petitioner along with others challenging the same, approached this Court by filing OJC No.9658 of 1995. 4.2. It is contended that pursuant to the interim order passed by this Court in the said Writ Petition on 25.04.1996, petitioner was allowed to continue on daily wage basis in terms of the order of appointment issued under Annexure-2. It is also contended that similarly situated employee terminated along with the petitioner vide order dated 31.05.1995 under Annexure-3, also approached this Court by filing W.P.(C) No.4006 of 1995. This Court vide order dated 28.03.1997, while disposing the Writ Petition, directed the Opp. Party- Corporation to regularize the petitioner therein against any vacancy that would arise in future. In terms of such direction, petitioner therein was regularized vide order dated 06.07.1998 under Annexure-12. Page 2 of 7 // 3 // 4.3. It is contended that petitioner in OJC No.4006 of 1995 as like the petitioner was engaged on daily wage basis on 22.01.1992 and petitioner was engaged on 15.10.1992. However, both of them along with others were terminated vide order dated 31.05.1995 under Annexure-3. 4.4. It is contended that in terms of the interim order passed in OJC No.9658 of 1995, though petitioner was allowed to continue, but petitioner was never regularized on the face of his long continuance on daily wage basis w.e.f. 15.10.1992. It is contended that since petitioner in OJC No.4006 of 1995 was regularized vide order dated 6.7.1998 under Annexure-2, petitioner being similarly situated should have been extended with similar benefit of regularization. 4.5. It is however contended that OJC No.9658 of 1995 when was disposed of as having become infructuous vide order dated 01.05.2019 under Annexure-6 without proper appreciation, petitioner filed an application for revival of the Writ Petition and the same was allowed vide order dated 13.03.2020 in CMAPL No.374 of 2019. 4.6. After such restoration of the Writ Petition, vide order dated 18.03.2020, OJC No.9658 of 1995 was disposed of by giving liberty to the petitioner to file a fresh Writ Petition, if any cause of action still survives. Page 3 of 7 // 4 // Pursuant to such liberty the present writ petition has been filed with the prayer as indicated here-in-above. 4.7. Learned counsel for the petitioner contended that since by the time the Writ Petition was disposed of on 13.03.2020, petitioner was continuing on contractual basis without getting the benefit of regularization, he filed the present writ petition inter alia seeking a direction on the Corporation to regularize his service. It is contended that since from his initial date of appointment from 15.10.1992, petitioner was allowed to continue on daily wage basis and then on contractual basis till date, in view of his long continuance, order of termination passed on 26.05.1995 under Annexure-3 has become infructuous and petitioner is entitled to get the benefit of regularization. 4.8. It is also contended that taking into account the benefit extended in favour of the petitioner in OJC No.4006 of 1995, petitioner is also eligible to get similar benefit of regularization. It is also contended that Petitioner in OJC No.4006 of 1995 in the meantime after being regularized, is holding the post of General Manager, whereas the petitioner is continuing as an Asst. Engineer (Mechanical) on contractual basis till date. It is accordingly that petitioner is eligible to get the benefit of regularization. Page 4 of 7 // 5 // 5. Learned counsel appearing for the Corporation on the other hand contended that since in the case of the petitioner in OJC No.4006 of 1995, this Court issued a direction to regularize him, while complying the said order, petitioner therein was regularized vide order dated 06.07.1998. Since no such direction was issued by this Court and the Writ Petition was disposed of as having infructuous subsequently restored by giving liberty to the petitioner to file a fresh Writ Petition if any cause of action survives, petitioner’s claim has not yet been considered. 5.1. It is also contended that he has no instruction as to whether any vacancy is available or not to regularize the services of the petitioner. It is accordingly contended that petitioner is not eligible to get the benefit as prayed for. 6. To the submission made by learned counsel appearing for the Corporation, learned counsel for the petitioner contended that not only petitioner in OJC No.4006 of 1995 was regularized pursuant to the order passed by this Court on 06.07.1998, but persons similarly situated have been regularized in the meantime. It is also contended that subsequent to the interim order passed and while continuing under the Corporation as a Contract Engineer- Degree (Mechanical), Committee in its proceeding under Page 5 of 7 // 6 // Annexure-8 series also found the petitioner eligible to get the benefit of absorption in General Category. Recommendation of the committee so found from Annexure-8 series reads as follows:- “According to the merit Sri Dibyajyoti Das can be absorbed in General category” 7. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and considering the submissions made, this Court finds that petitioner was engaged as NMR Assistant Engineer vide order dated 15.10.1992 under Annexure-2. While so continuing, petitioner along with so many similarly situated employees were terminated vide order dated 31.05.1995 under Annexure-3. Along with the petitioner, petitioner in OJC No.4006 of 1995 was also terminated vide order under Annexure-3. Pursuant to the order passed by this Court in OJC No.4006 of 1995, petitioner therein though was regularized vide order dated 06.07.1998, petitioner’s claim was never considered on the face of continuance w.e.f. 15.10.1992 and the interim order passed by this Court on 25.03.1996 in OJC No.9658 of 1995. Even after disposal of the Writ Petition as having become infructuous, petitioner was allowed to continue and his continuance as on date as a Contract Engineer (Mechanical) is not disputed. 7.1. Taking into account such long continuance of the petitioner w.e.f. 15.10.1992 and the benefit extended in favour of the petitioner in OJC No.4006 of 1995 vide order dated 06.07.1998, it is the view of this Court that claim of the petitioner should have been considered by Page 6 of 7 // 7 // absorbing him in the regular establishment. Therefore, this Court while disposing the Writ Petition, directs O.P. Nos.3 and 4 to take appropriate step and regularize the petitioner in his services with passing of an appropriate orders within a period of 3 (three) months from the date of receipt of this order. 8. The Writ Petition stands disposed of accordingly. (Biraja Prasanna Satapathy) Judge Basudev Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed Signed by: BASUDEV SWAIN Reason: Authentication Location: High Court of Orissa, Cuttack Date: 06-Aug-2025 18:53:47 Page 7 of 7