The High Court
Case Details
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK W.P.(C ) No.30755 of 2023 Subash Chandra Moharana …. Petitioner Mr. D.K. Ray, Adv. -versus- State of Odisha and Others …. Opposite Parties Mr. P.K. Sahoo, ASC COROM: JUSTICE BIRAJA PRASANNA SATAPATHY ORDER 30.05.2025 Order No W.P.(C ) No.30755 of 2023 & I.A. No.9003 of 2025 3. 1. This matter is taken up through Hybrid Mode. 2.
Legal Reasoning
Heard learned counsel appearing for the parties. 3. Petitioner has filed the present Writ Petition inter alia challenging order dt.24.08.2023 so passed by Government- Opp. Party No.1 under Annexure-10. 4. It is contended that Petitioner while continuing as a DLR in the establishment of Opp. Party No.4 w.e.f 01.01.1993, basing on the letter issued by the Government- Opp. Party No.1 on 05.08.2013 under Annexure-7, Petitioner was absorbed as against non-LFS existing vacancy in Jeypore Municipality vide office order dt.08.08.2013 under Annexure-8. Contents of letter dt.05.08.2013 and consequential Office order dt.08.08.2013 reads as follows: // 2 // Order dt.05.08.2013 “ xxx xxx xxx I am directed to refer to the subject noted above and say that after careful consideration of the information received from the ULBs with reference to the letter referred to above, Govt. have been pleased to allow the concerned ULBs to absorb 336 nos. of DLR/NMR workers against the existing vacancies as per the enclosed list at Annexure-A with the following stipulation. The scale of pay has been shown against the post. 1. The ULB concerned has to bear the additional financial liabilities on account of absorption. found to be 2. In case of any information furnished to the Govt. by the ULBs is concerned Municipal Commissioner/Executive Officer or any other official will be personally held responsible irregularities/lapses. Hence, the matter may be re-verified before taking steps for absorption. for such incorrect, the 3. The provision of ORV Act & Rules shall be followed strictly. 4. The date of absorption of the workers in the existing vacancy shall be considered from the date of actual joining in the post.” Order dt.08.08.2013 In pursuance to letter No.24822 dated 05.08.2013 of PD- cum-Joint Secretary to Govt. Housing & Urban Development department the following DLR/NMR workers have been absorbed against Non LFS existing vacancy in Jeypore Municipality in the pay scale of Rs.5200-20200 with grade pay of Rs.1900/-. They should submit their joining report to the undersigned with all the document as detailed in Annexure-1.
Legal Reasoning
1. Sri Agadhu Panigrahi………..Tax Sarkar 2. Sri Subash Ch. Maharana……Tax Sarlar 3. Sri M.G. Jotirmaya…………….Tax Sarkar 4. Sri Rama Ch. Behera……….. Tax Sarkar 5. Sri Durga Prasad Das…………..Tax Sarkar Page 2 of 5 // 3 // 4.1. It is contended that on the face of order of absorption passed by the Municipality-Opp. Party No.4 under Annexure-8 when Petitioner raised a claim to extend the benefit of absorption from his initial date of engagement i.e. 01.01.1993, the same was not considered by Opp. Party No.1. Accordingly, Petitioner approached this Court by filing W.P.(C ) No.25155 of 2022. This Court vide order dt.28.09.2022 directed Opp. Party No.1 to take a decision on the Petitioner’s claim with regard to his absorption w.e.f 01.01.1993 in place of the date of absorption so passed by the Municipality on 08.08.2013 under Annexure-8. 4.2. It is contended that in terms of the letter issued by the Government under Annxure-7 so implemented by the Municipality under Annexure-8, Petitioner was absorbed against the existing vacancy available in the Municipality. But by misinterpreting the contents of the letter issued under Annexure-7 and the implementation of the same vide order under Annexure-8, Petitioner vide the impugned order has been held to have been brought over to the Work charge establishment w.e.f 05.08.2013, vide order dt.08.08.2013. 4.3. It is contended that Petitioner was never brought over to the work charge establishment and instead he was permanently absorbed against the available vacancy, basing on the letter issued under Annexure-7 and consequential order passed under Annexure-8. It is accordingly contended that the ground on which claim of the petitioner has been rejected vide the impugned order dt.24.08.2023 under Annexure-10, is not sustainable in the eye of law. It is Page 3 of 5 // 4 // accordingly contended that the said order requires interference of this Court. 5. Even though notice of the Writ Petition has not been issued, but learned Addl. Standing Counsel basing on the stipulation contained in para-4 of letter dt.05.08.2013 under Annexure-7, contended that Petitioner’s date of absorption will be from the date of his actual joining in the post and Petitioner’s claim to regularise him from his initial date of joining as a DLR is not acceptable. 6. Having heard learned counsel appearing for the parties and considering the submission made, it is found that Petitioner while continuing as a DLR in the establishment of Opp. Party No.4 w.e.f 01.01.1993, in terms of the letter issued by the Government-Opp.party No.1 under Annexure- 7 on 05.08.2013, Petitioner was absorbed as against available existing vacancy vide Office Order dt.08.08.2013 under Annexure-8 of Opp. Party No.4. This Court nowhere found that Petitioner was brought over to the work charge establishment in terms of the letter issued under Annexure- 7 and consequential order issued under Annexure-8. Since Petitioner in terms of Annexures-7 and 8, has been absorbed as against an existing available vacancy, it cannot be held that Petitioner was absorbed in the work charge establishment with his date of joining as 05.08.2013. 6.1. In view of such irregularity which is apparent on the face of the impugned order, this Court is inclined to quash order dt.24.08.2023 so passed by Opp. Party No.1 under Annexure-10. While quashing the same, this Court remits Page 4 of 5 // 5 // the matter to Opp. Party No.1 to take a fresh decision with regard to the claim of the Petitioner in terms of the earlier order of this Court in WP(C ) No.25155 of 2022, within a period of two (2) months from the date of receipt of this order, with due communication. 7. The Writ Petition along with I.A accordingly stand
Decision
disposed of. (Biraja Prasanna Satapathy) Vacation Judge sangita Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed Signed by: SANGITA PATRA Reason: authentication of order Location: high court of orissa Date: 31-May-2025 18:47:42 Page 5 of 5