Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK
BIRAJA PRASANNA SATAPATHY
Sukanta Muduli – Appellant
Versus
State of Odisha – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. challenging order of non-regularization (Para 2 , 3) |
| 2. argument for regularization based on similar cases (Para 4) |
| 3. court analysis of entitlement to regularization (Para 5) |
| 4. disposition of the writ petition (Para 6) |
JUDGMENT :
1. Heard Mr. S.K. Mishra, learned counsel for Petitioner and learned counsel for the State-Opposite Parties.
3. It is the case of the petitioner that pursuant to the order issued by the Govt. on 27.07.1995, petitioner vide order dated 01.01.2002, so issued by Opp. Party No.4 under Annexure-1, was engaged as a contingent paid Chowkidar (Night Watchman) on daily wage basis w.e.f. 01.01.2002. Petitioner in terms of the said order, joined on 01.01.2002 itself as reflected from Annexure-2. Such engagement of the petitioner as a contingent paid Chowkidar, engaged in the office of Opp. Party No.4 was also communicated vide letter issued under Annexure-3.
3.2. However, on the face of such continuance of the petitioner as a contingent paid Night Watchman w.e.f. 01.01.2002 and approval of the post vide letter dated 26.11.2015 under Annexure-9, when no step was taken to regularize the services of the petitioner on the face of the request made under Ann
Long-term contingent employees are entitled to regularization after ten years of continuous service, barring any lawful justification for their ongoing temporary status.
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.
The court affirmed the obligations of the State to regularize long-serving employees in essential roles, emphasizing fair employment practices and adherence to constitutional provisions.
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 government has a duty to regularize long-serving irregular employees due to established legal principles mandating regularization for those meeting certain criteria, thereby ensuring job security....
Long-term daily wage employees, after 10 years of service, are entitled to regularization as established by Supreme Court principles in employment law.
Continuous employment in essential roles exhibits grounds for regularization, defying exploitative temporary contracts in violation of constitutional labor rights.
The court emphasized that rights to regularization must not be undermined by interim orders, as continuous service in a permanent role bears entitlement to regularization under fair labor practices.
The court ruled that employees engaged continuously for over ten years are entitled to regularization, regardless of irregular appointment status, reaffirming precedents from the Supreme Court highli....
The court emphasized the importance of regularizing long-serving temporary employees to ensure compliance with fairness principles and constitutional protections in employment.
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
