Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK
BIRAJA PRASANNA SATAPATHY
Umesh Kumar Das – Appellant
Versus
State of Odisha – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. the challenge against regularization denial due to procedural non-compliance. (Para 5) |
| 2. court's recognition of eligibility for regularization based on length of service. (Para 6) |
ORDER :
1. This matter is taken up through hybrid mode.
3. The present writ petition has been filed inter alia challenging order dtd.03.06.2022 so passed by the Govt.-Opp. Party No. 2 under Annexure-4. Vide the said order claim of the Petitioner to get the benefit of regularization under the provisions contained in Notification dtd.12.11.2013 of the G.A. Department and further notification issued by the said Department has been rejected.
4.1. Learned counsel appearing for the Petitioner contended that since Petitioner was appointed on contractual basis vide order of appointment issued on 28.11.2014 under Annexure-1, in view of the G.A. Department Resolution issued on 12.11.2013 and further Resolution issued on 14.01.2014, Petitioner became eligible to get the benefit of regularization after completion of 6 years of continuous service on contractual basis.
4.3. Learned counsel appearing for the Petitioner placing reliance on the documents available under Annexure-4, contended that Petitioner
Eligibility for regularization after six years of contract employment is upheld by relevant notifications and legal precedents.
The regularization of long-serving contractual employees is mandated when their roles are inherently permanent, ensuring compliance with employment laws and protections against exploitation.
The court emphasized that long uninterrupted service in governmental roles, despite initial irregular appointments, warrants consideration for regularization in accordance with established legal prec....
Long-term temporary employment in a sanctioned post qualifies employees for regularization when no lawful recruitment process is conducted, affirming their rights and job security.
Long-term adhoc employees have a right to regularization and benefits, as arbitrary continuation of their engagement undermines fairness and violates constitutional principles of employment.
The State's arbitrary rejection of a long-term temporary employee's regularization claim violates constitutional rights and obligations, emphasizing the need for fair employment practices under Artic....
The court reaffirmed that long-standing temporary employees, performing essential duties, must be regularized, rejecting claims of irregularity based solely on appointment processes without addressin....
The court affirmed that employees engaged long-term on contract are entitled to regularization, emphasizing fair employment rights and the need for governmental compliance with established norms and ....
Employment rights cannot be denied based on temporary status when similarly situated individuals have been granted permanent positions, violating the principle of equality under Article 14.
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
