The High Court
Case Details
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK W.P.(C) No.37104 of 2022 Jayagopal Swain …. Petitioner Mr. P.K. Behera, Advocate State of Odisha and others -versus- …. Opp. Parties Mr. T.K. Pattanaik, A.S.C. CORAM: JUSTICE A.K. MOHAPATRA Order No.
Decision
ORDER 05.01.2023 01. 1. This matter is taken up through Hybrid Arrangement (Virtual /Physical Mode). 2. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner as well as learned counsel for the State. Perused the record. 3. The present writ petition has been filed by the petitioner with the following prayers: “The Petitioner, therefore, most humbly prays that your Lordship would be graciously pleased to issue Rule NISI calling upon the Opp. parties to show cause as to why the Opp. parties should not be directed to regularize the service of the petitioner on completion of 10 years of service as Driver with all consequential and financial benefits. And if the Opp. Parties fail to show case or sufficient cause, the Rule be made absolute. And issue any other order or orders as this Hon’ble Court deem fit and proper;” 4. It is submitted by learned counsel for the Petitioner that the petitioner, who is having matriculation qualification and valid driving license, was initially appointed as Jeep Driver in TLC (Total Literacy Camp) and PLC(Public Literacy Camp) under the District Rural // 2 // Development Agency (DRDA) on 03.07.1993 in the office of the Banspal Block in the district of Keonjhar. On the basis of such experience, the petitioner was appointed as driver on temporary basis. Pursuant to the letter dated 16.06.1996, the Project Director, DRDA, Keonjhar issued an appointment order in favour of the petitioner on contractual basis for a period of one year. Thereafter, the petitioner continuing in the office of the Opposite Party on contractual basis at different places on contractual basis. On all of a sudden, the petitioner met with road accident as a result of which the petitioner has sustained fracture injury on the left leg. Accordingly, the petitioner submitted a leave application. Thereafter, the petitioner submitted joining report and such joining report did not accepted by the authority and is not given any engagement as a result of which the petitioner compelled to approach this Court by filing a writ petition bearing W.P.(C) No.10271 of 2009. The said writ petition was disposed of by this Court vide order dated 29.11.2019 with a direction to the Collector and District Magistrate, Keonjhar and the Project Director, DRDA, Keonjhar to consider the case of the petitioner for fresh engagement against the vacancies post at this moment or in future either in the post of Driver or in any other post under the D.R.D.A., Keonjhar. Pursuant to the direction of this Court, the petitioner approached the Collector-cum-CEO, DRDA, Keonjhar vide order No.1348/DRDA(K) dated 22.03.2021engaged the petitioner as Peon at DRDA, Keonjhar on contractual basis for a period of one year with effect from the date of joining of the said post and he was allowed a consolidated remuneration of Rs.8070/-. Such appointment was subject to further stipulation that the contract of the petitioner will be renewed for satisfactory performance of service and it was further mentioned that the engagement order is purely // 3 // temporary in nature. 5. The present writ petition has been filed by the petitioner with a prayer for regularization of service by taking into consideration long past services of the petitioner and keeping in view the decision of this Court in the case of Judhistira Dang vrs. State of Odisha and others in W.P.(C) No.8446 of 2009 decided on 15.02.2012. 6. Learned counsel for the State, on the other hand, submits that the engagement of the petitioner was purely temporary in nature. He further submits that such fresh appointment made on the order passed by this Court on contractual basis for consolidated remuneration. Therefore, the petitioner cannot claim for regularization of service. In such view of the matter, learned counsel for the State submits that the writ petition is devoid of merit and the same should be dismissed. 7. After considering the materials available on record as well as submissions made by both the sides and taking into consideration the length of service, this Court is of the considered view that the present case is a glaring example of exploitation of work force by the employer. It is most unfortunate to indicate here that a Government has indulged in such practice and continuing with the illegalities despite observations made by the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India in the case of Secretary, State of Karnataka vrs. Uma Devi : reported in AIR 2006 S.C. 1806. An identical issue of exploitation of an employee by a Government College had engaged the attention of this Court in the case of Basanta Kumar Barik vrs, State of Odisha and others (WPC (OA) No.616 of 2017) disposed of on 26.11.2021. While taking note of leading judgments on the subject this Court finally directed the authorities to consider the case for regularization of the Petitioner in the light of Uma Devi’s case (supra) and to pay all the legitimate dues payable to the Petitioner in that case. The fact // 4 // of the present case is similar to the facts of the case in Basanta Kumar Barik vrs. State of Odisha and others(supra). 8. Having heard learned counsel for the parties, and upon conspectus of peculiar background of the facts of the case, this Court deems it proper to dispose of the writ petition by directing the petitioner to approach before the Collector & District Magistrate, Keonjahr-Opposite Party No.2 by filing a fresh representation highlighting his grievances along with copies of the relevant documents and judgments in support of his claim within a period of four weeks from today. In the event such a representation is filed within the aforesaid period, the Opposite Party No.2 shall do well to take a final decision in the matter and further it is directed that the case for regularization of the Petitioner’s service in the light of the judgment rendered in the case of Basanta Kumar Barik vrs. State of Odisha and others (supra) within a period of three months from the date of production of certified copy of this order. In the event the service of the Petitioner is regularized, it is needless to say that the authorities shall calculate all the arrear dues payable to the Petitioner within a period of one month from the date of such decision. The Opposite Parties are further directed to pay current dues as well as service benefits as due and admissible in law to the Petitioner. 9. With the aforesaid observation/direction, the writ petition is disposed of. Urgent certified copy of this order be granted on proper application. Jagabandhu ( A.K. Mohapatra) Judge