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

2022 Supreme(Ori) 634

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK
Murahari Sri Raman, J.
Debendranath Sahoo – Appellant
Versus
State of Odisha & Ors. – Respondents
WPC (OA) No. 1791 of 2017 (in the matter of an application under Articles 226 & 227 of the Constitution of India, 1950)
Decided On : 02-09-2022

Advocates appeared:
Mr. Prasanta Kumar Mishra, Advocate for the petitioner, for the Appellant; Mr. Lalatendu Samantaray, Additional Government Advocate, for the Respondent

Headnote:(A) Constitution of India, 1950 - Articles 38, 226 & 227 - Regularization of service - The court emphasized the State’s duty to ensure fairness to employees and not to exploit them, referencing Article 38 on the welfare of people - The petitioner, a watchman in work charged establishment, sought regularization prior to retirement for pension benefits due to continuous service since 1983 - The court highlighted the illegal and arbitrary nature of not regularizing his service despite vacancies and stressed the need for the State to adhere to previous directives for fair treatment - The court directed consideration of the petitioner's case for regularization based on long service and previous judgments reinforcing similar claims - Findings indicate the necessity for the State to create supernumerary posts where no vacancies exist for regularization purposes. (Paras 6, 9, 10, 13, 16)

Facts of the case:
The petitioner was engaged as a watchman under a work charged establishment and sought the regularization of his service to secure pension benefits before retirement, highlighting long service and lack of action from the State despite recommendations for regularization.

Findings of Court:
The court found that the State failed to regularize the petitioner’s service and ordered a review of his case for eligibility for pension, noting the common treatment of similarly situated employees in past cases.

Issues: The main issues were the legality of the State's action in not regularizing service and the corresponding entitlement to pensionary benefits.

Ratio Decidendi: The court ruled that long-term service merits regularization, and that existing policies should be adhered to by the State, emphasizing humane treatment in accordance with constitutional principles.

Result: The petition was disposed of with a direction for the State to reevaluate the petitioner’s position for potential regularization and pension entitlements.

Table of Content
1. worker's qualification for regularization. (Para 2 , 3)
2. arguments against eligibility for regularization. (Para 4 , 5)
3. citing precedent for similar cases. (Para 6)
4. employers' obligation to provide benefits based on long service. (Para 9 , 11)
5. decision to extend benefits to similar employees. (Para 12 , 16)

JUDGMENT

1. This matter is taken up by virtual/physical mode.

    'The State to secure a social order for the promotion of the welfare of the people.- The State shall strive to promote the welfare of the people by securing and protecting as effectively as it may a social order in which justice, social, economic and political, shall inform all the institutions of the national life.

    The State shall, in particular, strive to minimize the inequalities in income, and endeavour to eliminate inequalities in status, P.T.O. facilities and opportunities, not only amongst individuals but also amongst groups of people residing in different areas or engaged in different vocations.'

Article 38, the Constitution of India, 1950

2. The petitioner-WATCHMAN UNDER THE WORK CHARGED ESTABLISHMENT, as applicant before the Odisha Administrative Tribunal in O.A. No.1791 of 2017 filed under Section 19 of the ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL ACT , 1985, which is later renumbered as WPC (OA) No.1791 of 2017 being transferred to this Court, at the verge of retirement in the year 2017, came up with grievance that his representation to bring his service over to regular establishment was not paid due attention, as a consequence, he would be deprived of service benefit including pensionary benefits. Therefore, the petitioner has sought for the following reliefs:

    'The Hon'ble Tribunal may be pleased to declare that the action of the respondents in not regularizing the service of the applicant in regular establishment despite of vacancies is illegal and arbitrary;

    The Hon'ble Tribunal may be pleased to direct the respondent to absorb the service of the applicant in regular establishment prior to date of his superannuation and extend all benefits including pensionary benefits as due admissible to him within a time to be stipulated;

    Pass any other relief(s) the Hon'ble Tribunal deems fit and proper for the interest of justice.'

3. The fact as set forth by the petitioner reveals that having qualification of Class IX and being qualified as 'welder' from Industrial Training Institute, he was initially engaged as Nominal Muster Roll (NMR) employee under the Executive Engineer, Minor Irrigation Division, Khurda on 01.12.1983. Since his service along with many others was not regularized, the Employees Union approached the Government. Instead of bringing the petitioner over to regular establishment, he was brought over to work charged establishment at the age of about 53 years having rendered around 33 years of service vide Office Order bearing No.1451/CMIC/Bhubaneswar, dated 23rd April, 2010 (Annexure-2) which runs as follows:

    'In pursuance of Lr. No.5330, dated 19.04.2010 of Chief Engineer, Minor Irrigation, Orissa, Bhubaneswar Sri Debendranath Sahoo, NMR is hereby brought over as a watchman under work charged establishment in the scale of pay Rs.4440- 7440 (pay band-1S) with Grade Pay Rs.1,500.00 and other allowances sanctioned by the Government of Odisha from time to time and posted as such under Junior Engineer, M.I. Mech.

    Section, Bhubaneswar under Asst. Executive Engineer, S&M (MI) Sub-Division, Bhubaneswar under MI Division, Khurda as is where is basis until further order from his date of joining as a watchman. ***'

3.1. It is claimed by the petitioner that as he complied with the terms and conditions envisaged in the Government of Odisha in Finance Department Resolution dated 15th May, 1997 (Annexure-1) his service is liable to be regularized. The petitioner laid stress on said Resolution which runs as follows:

    'No.WFI-24/97-22764/F Government of Orissa Finance Department

    ***

    Resolution Bhubaneswar, dated, the 15th May, 1997

    Sub.: Scheme for absorption of NMR/

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 Back to top