Judgment

Dr. B.R.Sarangi, J.

Both the writ applications having arisen out of same cause of action were heard together and are disposed of by this common judgment. The petitioners in both the two writ petitions, who are working as Sales Assistant-cum-Godown Assistant, Drivers and Kantabalas respectively under the Orissa State Civil Supplies Corporation Ltd. have challenged the notice dated 29.12.1999 issued by the Collector, Sundargarh, vide Annexure-3, inviting applications for engagement of daily wage employees in respect of the very same posts manned by the petitioners specifying the rate of wages to be paid and the required qualification and have sought direction to opposite party that as they are the existing staff working on daily wage basis as per the direction of previous Collector, they be allowed to continue in service as long as the distribution system is continuing until their services are regularized by the competent authority.

2. The short facts of the case, in hand, are that Orissa State Civil Supplies Corporation Ltd. vide letter no. 6659 dated 25.8.1999 addressed to the District Managers of Bargarh/ Mayurbhanj/ Nabarangpur/ Rayagada/ Sambalpur and Sundargarh allotted Mobile Vans to facilitate distribution of food-grains in the interior areas in their respective districts. Accordingly, seven mobile vans were allotted and District Managers were instructed to engage staff for the vehicles, namely, Sales Assisant-cum-Godown Assistant, Drivers and Kantawallas on daily basis and to pay them wages as per the norms prescribed by the Corporation. The District Manager, Sundargarh after considering the suitability and qualification of the petitioners engaged them on daily wage basis. As per the guidelines, such engagements were temporary, liable to be terminated at any point of time by the appointing authority. Petitioners on being selected, were engaged to work in the respective posts. While they were so working, due to change of the Collector, the new incumbent directed cancellation of such engagement of the petitioners and further directed the District Manager, Sundargarh to take steps for fresh selection. As a consequence thereof the Notice dated 29.12.99, Annexure-3 was issued, hence the present writ applications seeking to suspend operation thereof until disposal of these writ applications and to issue necessary direction as deemed proper.

3. Mr. P.K. Ray, learned counsel for the petitioners, relying upon the settled position of law laid down in R.T. Rangachari v. Secretary of State, AIR 1937 P.C. 27, wherein it is held that in a case in which after government officials duly competent and duly authorized in that behalf, have arrived honestly at one decision, their successors-in-office, after the decision has been acted upon and is in effective operation, cannot purport to enter upon a reconsideration of the matter to arrive at another and totally different decision, submitted that once a Collector has engaged the present petitioners to work in the respective posts, his successor Collector could not have directed otherwise overriding the order of the earlier Collector stating that the said categories of posts were required to be filled up through the local Employment Exchange on daily wage basis pursuant to Annexure-3.

He further submitted due procedure having already been followed while engaging the petitioners and the engagement orders having been acted upon; the successor Collector is not permitted in law to allow another procedure to be followed for filling up of the very same posts against which the petitioners are continuing instead of regularizing their services. Therefore, such action of the successor Collector being arbitrary, unreasonable and contrary to the provisions of law, and the Notice, Annexure-3 to O.J.C. No. 590/2000 being unwarranted in law, further action pursuant thereto may be directed not to be carried on.

4. Mr. A.K. Mishra, learned Addl. Govt. Advocate for the State relies upon the office ord