The High Court
Case Details
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK W.P.(C) No.26942 of 2023 Miss Kumari Bhatta …. Petitioner Mr. B.K. Mohanty, Advocate -versus- State of Odisha and others …. Opp. Parties Mr. Saswat Das, A.G.A. CORAM: JUSTICE A.K. MOHAPATRA Order No.
Decision
ORDER 23.08.2023 01. 1. This matter is taken up through Hybrid Arrangement (Virtual /Physical Mode). 2. Heard learned counsel for the Petitioner as well as learned Additional Government Advocate appearing for the State-Opposite Parties. 3. The present writ petition has been filed by the Petitioner with the following prayers:- “It is, therefore prayed that this Hon’ble Court this writ may graciously be pleased application, issue notice to the Opp. Parties, call for the relevant records and after hearing the counsel for the parties may issue a Writ of Mandamus by way of passing the following order/directions:- to admit i) the To quash Impugned order dated 06.07.2023 as well as consequential order dated 07.07.2023 passed by the Opposite Party No.3 under Annexure-8 & 9 respectively; // 2 // ii) To direct the Opp. Party No.3 to extend the salary of the petitioner against the post of “Peon” in the scale of pay of Rs.4750/- to Rs.14,680/- with Grade Pay of Rs.1500/- w.e.f. 17.09.2023 considering the fact that the services of the petitioner has been regularized w.e.f. 17.09.2023 as per the Order dated 26.05.2016 passed under Annexure-5; iii) To direct the Opp. Parties to re-fix the salary of the petitioner and to disburse all the consequential benefits within the time framed by this Hon’ble Court; And/or pass such order/orders as deemed fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the present case.” 4. It is submitted by learned counsel for the Petitioner that the Petitioner was initially appointed on contractual basis against a regular vacant post of Peon in the State Standard Laboratory, Bhubaneswar vide letter dated 23.9.2002 under Annexure-1 issued under the signature of Controller, Legal Metrology, Orissa. Thereafter, she continued in the said post. On the basis of the Resolution of the G.A. Department, Government of Odisha dated 17.09.2013 under Annexure-2, the case of the Petitioner was placed before the High Power Committee for regularization. The High Power Committee in its meeting held on 16.03.2016 has categorically observed that though the appointment of Miss Bhatta had not been made against contractual post in consonance with provisions as elucidated in G.A. Department Resolution dated 16.01.2014, it was made against sanctioned regular post with concurrence of the Finance Department. In such view of the matter, the High Power Committee has further observed that considering the aforesaid facts and length of service rendered by the Petitioner, the Committee recommended for // 3 // her regular appointment as Peon against the existing vacancy w.e.f. 17.9.2013 in pursuant to the provisions contained in G.A. Department Resolution dated 17.09.2013 under Annexue-2 to the writ application. Thereafter, the Petitioner was issued with a regular appointment order dated 26.5.2016 whereunder her services were regularized in the post of Peon w.e.f. 17.9.2013 pursuant to the decision of the High Power Committee in a scale of pay reflected in the appointment letter. While the matter stood thus, all of a sudden the Opposite Party No.3-Controller of Legal Metrology, Odisha, Bhubaneswar issued another office order dated 6.7.2023 under Annexure-8 to the writ petition thereby modifying the earlier appointment order dated 26.05.2016 under Annexue-5 to the extent that the Petitioner’s service shall be regularized in the post of Peon w.e.f. 17.9.2013, however, the financial benefit shall be paid to her from the date she actually joined in the said post. In such view of the matter, learned counsel for the Petitioner further contended that in Memo No.2177 dated 6.7.2023, the Additional Controller, Legal Metrology, Odisha, Directorate of Legal Metrology, Food Supplies & Consumer Welfare Department, Govt. of Odisha, Khandagiri, Bhubaneswar has intimated the Account Section to recover the amount which has already been paid to the Petitioner from 17.9.2023 to 26.05.2016 from her monthly salary @ Rs.9,000/- per month. Being aggrieved by such conduct, the Petitioner has approached this Court by filing the present writ petition. 5. Learned Additional Government Advocate appearing for the State-Opposite Parties, on the other hand, submitted that pursuant to the decision of the High Power Committee, the service of the Petitioner has already been regularized in the post of Peon. However, he further contended that since the Petitioner was regularized vide // 4 // letter dated 26.05.2016 under Annexure-5 and pursuant to such appointment letter, she has joined thereafter, the Opposite Party No.3 has taken decision to release the financial benefit in favour of the Petitioner from the date of her joining pursuant to the letter dated 26.05.2016 under Annexure-5. Accordingly, learned Additional Government Advocate submitted that the Opposite Party No.3 has not committed any mistake in issuing the office order dated 6.7.2023 under Annexure-8 to the writ petition. 6. Having heard the learned counsels appearing for the respective parties and on a careful examination of the materials placed before this Court as well as the pleadings in the writ petition, this Court is of the considered view that the date of joining of the Petitioner and the decision taken by the High Power Committee in its meeting dated 16.03.2016 has not been disputed by either side, moreover this Court observed that pursuant to the decision of the High Power Committee dated 16.03.2016, the authorities have regularized the service of the Petitioner w.e.f. 17.9.2013. It is also observed by this Court that the Petitioner was initial appointment against a regular vacant post as a Peon and she was discharging her duties as a Peon from the date of her initial appointment under Annexure-1 to the writ petition. Therefore, there was no change in the nature of work even after regularization of her service. 7. Considering the aforesaid facts, the High Power Committee has taken a decision to regularize the service of the Petitioner w.e.f. 17.9.2013. In such view of the matter, the office order dated 6.7.2023 under Annexure-8 modifying the decision under Annexure-5 dated 26.5.2016 several years after such a decision was taken appears to be illegal and unsustainable in law. Accordingly, the impugned order // 5 // dated 06.07.2023 as well as consequential order dated 07.07.2023 passed by the Opposite Party No.3-Controller Legal Metrology, Odisha, Bhubaneswar under Annexure-8 & 9 respectively are hereby quashed. The matter is remanded back to the Opposite Party No.3 to reconsider the entire issue keeping in view the decision of the High Power Committee dated 16.3.2016 under Annexue-3 to the writ petition and pass necessary order in the light of the observation made hereinabove. Let the Petitioner approaches the Opposite Party No.3 along with a certified copy of this order within two weeks from today. In the event the Petitioner approaches the Opposite Party No.3, the Opposite Party No.3 shall do well to complete the entire exercise as has been directed hereinabove within a period of six weeks from the date of communication of a certified copy of this order by the Petitioner. The decision so taken be communicated to the Petitioner within two weeks thereafter. 8. With the aforesaid observation and direction the writ petition is disposed of. Debasis ( A.K. Mohapatra) Judge Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed Signed by: DEBASIS AECH Designation: Secretary Reason: Authentication Location: OHC CUTTACK Date: 26-Aug-2023 18:47:07