The High Court
Case Details
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK W.P.(C) No.36457 of 2023 Charulata Moharana State of Odisha and others -versus- Petitioner …. Mr.K.C.Sahu, Advocate …. Opp.Parties Mr.P.C.Das, A.S.C. CORAM: JUSTICE A.K.MOHAPATRA Order No.
Decision
ORDER 08.11.2023 01. 1. This matter is taken up through Hybrid Arrangement (Virtual /Physical Mode). 2. Heard learned counsel for the Petitioner as well as the learned Additional Standing Counsel for the State. Perused the Writ Petition as well as the documents annexed thereto. 3. The present Writ Petition has been filed with the following prayer : i) ii) “ It is therefore prayed that the Hon’ble Court be graciously pleased to pass following relief(s):- The Hon’ble Court be pleased to admit and allow this Writ Petition. The Hon’ble Court be graciously pleased to quash the HPC recommendation so far it relates to regularisation of Opp.Party No.4 as per Annexure-7 dated 17.10.2023 by further directing the Opp.Parties No.1 & 3 for regular absorption of service of the Petitioner against the regular sanctioned vacant post of MPHW(F) under SEBC category from the date of completion of six years of contractual the HPC service recommendation under annexure-7 order dated 17.10.2023 with all consequential service and financial benefits within a time bound period for the interest of justice. by modifying necessary if Page 1 of 2 // 2 // iii) The Hon’ble Court be pleased to pass any other order(s)/direction(s) as deems fit and proper for the bona fide interest of justice.” 4. It is submitted by Mr.K.C.Sahu, learned counsel for the Petitioner that the Petitioner initially joined in service on 25.10.2013 as MPHW(F) as per Annexure-3 to the Writ Petition on being duly selected by the Selection Committee pursuant to an advertisement under Annexure-1. While continuing as such, the Government of Odisha notified a set of Rule i.e., Odisha Multi Purpose Health Worker (Female) Service (Method of Recruitment & Conditions of Service) Rules, 2019 on 08.03.2019. As per the provisions contained in the said Rule, the persons working as ANM/MPHW(F) are to be regularized in service. So far the Petitioner is concerned, learned counsel for the Petitioner submitted that her case for regularization of service was recommended by the competent authority. The matter of regularisation of MPHW(F) was placed before the HPC constituted by the State Government. The HPC in its meeting held on 24.08.2023 recommended the case of 25 nos. of candidates for regularization of their services in respect of Kendrapara district in different categories of candidates, which includes UR - 18, SC -5 & SEBC-2. It is also contended by the learned counsel for the Petitioner that the Petitioner belongs to SEBC category and initially appointed on 25.10.2013. Learned counsel for the Petitioner at this juncture contended that the HPC has committed a serious illegalities in recommending the name of Dulana Pradhan, who is admittedly junior to the Petitioner as she was appointed on 28.10.2013 i.e. after the Petitioner was appointed. Mr.Sahu, learned counsel for the Petitioner further contended that in view of the provisions of Rules, 2019, the Petitioner’s service is to be regularized Page 2 of 4 // 3 // on completion of six years i.e. with effect from 25.10.2013. However, due to non-availability of SEBC post, the case of the Petitioner could not be considered. The HPC which was considering the case of MPHW(F) for regularization has committed illegality in not considering the case of the Petitioner. Accordingly, the Petitioner approached the Chief District Medical Officer, Kendrapara by filing a representation under Annexure-8 to the Writ Petition. After considering the representation of the Petitioner, the CDMO, Kendrapara has written a letter to the Director, Family Welfare vide Letter No. 14235 dated 02.11.2023 under Annexure-9 clearly narrating the factual background of the case and the representation of the Petitioner has been forwarded to the Office of the Director, Family Welfare. Since no decision has been taken, the Petitioner being aggrieved by such inaction of the Opposite Parties, the Petitioner has approached this Court by filing the present Writ Petition. 5. On the other hand, learned Additional Standing Counsel contended that it appears from the record that the Petitioner has already approached the CDMO, Kendrpara by filing a representation under Annexure-8 to the Writ Petition. The CDMO, Kendrapara has already forwarded the representation to the Government i.e. Director, Family Welfare. In such view of the matter, learned Additional Standing Counsel submitted that the Director, Family Welfare be directed to consider the representation of the Petitioner in accordance with law within a stipulated period of time and he will have no objection to the same. 6. Considering the submissions made by the learned counsel for the respective parties, on a careful examination of the background Page 3 of 4 // 4 // facts of the present case and keeping in view the limited nature of grievance, this Court deems it proper to dispose of the Writ Petition at the stage of admission by directing the Director, Family Welfare, Opposite Party No.2 to take a decision on the representation of the Petitioner under Annexure-8 as well as the letter of the Chief District Medical & Public Health Officer, Kendrapara under Annexure-9 to the Writ Petition. Further, it is directed that the Director, Family Welfare shall place the matter before the Opposite Party No.1, who shall place the matter before the HPC for taking a final decision in the matter keeping in view the allegations made by the Petitioner in her representation. The final decision, which is likely to be taken by the HPC be communicated to the Petitioner within two weeks from the date of taking such decision. Let the entire exercise be carried out within two months from the date of communication of certified copy of this order. Considering the nature of allegations, this Court further directs that before a final decision is taken in the matter, no final appointment order shall be issued to Opposite Party No.4 by the authorities for a period of two months or till a decision is taken by the HPC. It is also directed that before passing an order which is likely to affect Opposite Party no.4, the Opposite Party No.2 shall provide an opportunity of hearing to Opposite Party No.4. 7. With the aforesaid observation, the Writ Petition stands disposed of. 8. Issue urgent certified copy of this order as per Rules. RKS Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed Signed by: RAMESH KUMAR SINGH Reason: Authentication Location: High Court of Orissa Date: 10-Nov-2023 11:19:20 (A.K. Mohapatra) Judge Page 4 of 4