SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

2021 Supreme(Ori) 167

B.R.SARANGI
Manohar Sahoo – Appellant
Versus
B. K. Pattnaik – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
S. Patra, Advocate, H.K. Panigrahi, Advocate

JUDGMENT

Dr. B.R. Sarangi, J. - All the above noted contempt petitions arise out of a common order dated 16.11.1999 passed by the Odisha Administrative Tribunal in O.A. No.2559 (C) of 1999 and batch. The petitioners herein as applicants filed separate Original Applications, as mentioned above. Since the said Original Applications involved identical question of facts and law, they were allowed by the tribunal vide common order dated 16.11.1999. The said order having not been complied with, individual contempt petitions were filed before the Odisha Administrative Tribunal for compliance. But after abolition of Odisha Administrative Tribunal, those contempt petitions have been transferred to this Court and renumbered as above. Since common cause of action is involved, all the contempt petitions are taken up together and are disposed of by this judgment, which will govern in all the contempt petitions.

2. The petitioners in the above noted contempt petitions were engaged in the work-charged establishment and were not brought over to regular establishment on completion of five years of service from the date of their entry. Their grievance is that if they are not appointed in any regular p

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top