Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK
BIRAJA PRASANNA SATAPATHY
Ranjita Jena – Appellant
Versus
State of Odisha – Respondent
ORDER :
Biraja Prasanna Satapathy, J.
1. This matter is taken up through Hybrid Arrangement (Virtual/Physical) Mode.
2. Heard learned counsel for the parties.
3. The present Writ Petition has been filed inter alia challenging the impugned order dated 13.08.2024, so passed by the Govt.-O.P. No.1 under Annexure-11. Vide the said order, claim of the petitioner for extension of the benefit of pension and by treating the petitioner to have retired from regular establishment prior to his retirement under OCS(Pension) Rules, 1992 was rejected.
4. It is the case of the petitioner that petitioner was engaged as a NMR in the establishment of Opp. Party No.3. It is contended that even though petitioner was engaged as a NMR w.e.f. 01.04.1983, but in terms of the finance department Resolution issued on 15.05.1997 under Annexure-3, no step was taken to regularize him in his services. Not only that on the face of such long continuance, petitioner’s claim was also not considered for absorption in the regular establishment in the light of the judgment passed by the Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of Secretary, State of Karnataka vs. Uma Devi (3), (2006) 4 SCC-1.
4.1. However, in the meantime vide order d
Employee claims for pension must be considered in light of prior judicial rulings on regularization, asserting rights after prolonged service without due process.
The court ruled that a long-term employee in a Work Charged Establishment is eligible for regularization and pension benefits if similar past claims were upheld, despite prior procedural lapses.
The court held that employees regularized despite not formally joining are still entitled to pensionary benefits, emphasizing fairness in public employment rights.
The court ruled that work charged employees, having served continuously in similar positions, are entitled to pension benefits despite not being parties in previous relevant cases, ensuring equitable....
Inaction by the State in not regularizing long-serving employees cannot deprive them of valid pension benefits under existing rules, irrespective of completed qualifying service requirements.
State delays in regularizing services do not justify withholding pension benefits for long-serving employees; equal treatment and fair engagement practices must be upheld.
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
