The failure to implement earlier directions gave rise to a fresh cause of action, and discrimination in the regularization process is not justified.

JUDGMENT :

1. This writ petition by the State of Odisha through the Forest and Environment Department challenges an order dated 14th November, 2012 passed by the State Administrative Tribunal, Bhubaneswar (‘Tribunal’) in O.A. No.163 of 2008 whereby a direction was issued to the Petitioners to regularize the services of the Opposite Party by relaxing Rule 3(1) of the Orissa Ministerial Services (Method of Recruitment to the Post of Junior Clerk to the District Offices) Rules, 1985 (‘OMS Rules, 1985’) by issuing a notification and giving him all consequential service and financial benefits with effect from 24th November, 1984.

2. The background facts are that the Opposite Party was initially appointed as a Junior Clerk on ad hoc basis for a period of 89 days by an order dated 27th September, 1984 issued by the Working Plan Officer, Koraput Circle for the period from 10th September, 1984 to 7th December, 1984 on the pay scale of Rs.255-390/-with D.A. and A.D.A as admissible from time to time. It was stated that “the appointment is purely temporary and terminable at any time without any notice assigning any reason thereof.”

By a subsequent order dated 24th November, 1984 the Opposite Party was again appointed as Junior Clerk and allowed to continue as such until further orders. It was reiterated that the appointment was ‘purely temporary and terminable at any time without any notice assigning any reason thereof”. The admitted position is that Opposite Party continued as such.

3. In the meanwhile, on 17th April, 1987 the Chief Secretary to the Government wrote to the Secretaries of all the Departments of the Government stating that they should immediately terminate the services of adhoc/temporary employees and to fill up the vacancies by the candidates from the list drawn up by the Collectors. Despite this, the Opposite Party continued as Junior Clerk.

4. On 6th May, 1991 the Principal Chief Conservator of Forests circulated to all the Offices the letter received from the General Administration Department (‘GA Department’) regarding ‘regularization of the irregular recruitments against the Post of Junior Clerks in the District Offices and Sub-ordinate Offices.

Inter alia, in para 4 of this letter, it was stated as under:

“4. After carefully considering the problems relating to regularization of such irregular appointments in the district and sub-ordinate Offices, Govt. have approved the following principles. You are, therefore, requested to take necessary follow up action accordingly to solve the problems faced by such irregular recruitments.

(1) Such recruitments should have put in at least one-year continuous service in one or more spells in the same office. Adhoc appointees of this category whose services have been terminated may be allowed to join and work in such offices provisionally subject to availability of vacancies.

(2) Two chances should be given to them to appear in the next two consecutive recruitment examinations.

(3) Condonation of age may be done by the Collector, both for appearing in the examination and for appointment.

(4) Details of such appointments should be furnished to the Collector/Head of Deptt/and to the concerned administrative department.”

5. Despite the above instructions, the services of the Opposite Party were not regularized. He then filed OA No.2143 of 1993 in the Tribunal praying that his services should be regularized. The Tribunal passed an interim order on 26th November, 1993 that his services should not be discontinued. This continued till the final order dated 9th February, 1999 of the Tribunal in which, after extracting para 4 of the above circular, the Tribunal noted the contention of counsel for the Opposite Party that since he is appointed prior to the coming into force of the OMS Rules, 1985 he should not be subjected to the conditions laid down in para 4 of the letter. The Tribunal rejected the contention as not being sound. A direction was issued to the Petitioners to consider the case of the Op