The court ruled that employees employed for lengthy periods cannot be denied regularization of service, emphasizing principles of fairness and equality under the Constitution.

JUDGMENT :

MURAHARI SRI RAMAN, J.

The mighty State-Municipal Administration has preferred this appeal questioning propriety of the decision taken by a learned Single Judge of this Court vide Judgment dated 29.10.2024 delivered in W.P.(C) No.16335 of 2018 apparently in order to thwart extension of pensionary benefits to the respondent, who worked in the Cuttack Municipal Corporation since 1990 on daily wage basis till his absorption in service with effect from 14.08.2015 instead of initial date of engagement, i.e., 01.11.1990, ignoring to acknowledge his yeomen service rendered to the Organisation for more than 25 years.

1.1. This intra-Court appeal is directed against the Judgement dated 29.10.2024 rendered by a learned Single Bench in an application, bearing W.P.(C) No.16335 of 2018, under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India with the following prayer(s):

“Under these circumstances, the Appellants most humbly pray that this Hon'ble Court be graciously pleased to Admit this Appeal, call for the records and after hearing the parties, be pleased to set-aside the impugned judgment dated 29.10.2024 passed by the Hon'ble Single Judge in WP(C) No.16335 of 2018 under Annexure-2 in the interest of justice;

And further be pleased to pass such other order/orders as the Hon'ble Court deem fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case;

And for this act of kindness the Appellants shall as in duty bound ever pray.”

Facts culled out from the record:

2. Having joined in the post of Junior Assistant on 01.11.1990 on daily wage basis under the Cuttack Municipality (presently, Cuttack Municipal Corporation), he was allowed to work till 31.03.1992 along with others by virtue of Office Order dated 04.03.1992 issued pursuant to Council Resolution dated 15.02.1992. By issue of Office Order dated 30.03.1996 he was allowed enhanced allowance in pursuance of the Agreement made by the Management with Cuttack Mehentar Sangh and Cuttack Municipal Corporation.

2.1. The Director, Municipal Administration vide Letter dated 29.10.1996 instructed Executive Officer of all Urban Local Bodies to sponsor applications of such Junior Assistants who were irregularly appointed by the Council between 10.09.1982 to 30.06.1992. Since name of the respondent did not find place in the list furnished, nevertheless the case of his junior (NMR) was considered vide Letter dated 22.04.1998, he made application addressed to the Director, Municipal Administration and Executive Officer of the Corporation. Selection test being conducted, 148 in-service candidates, engaged between 15.09.1982 and 30.06.1992, have been selected and were allowed to draw regular scale of pay. They were shown in the seniority list from the date of their initial engagement vide Order No. LFS (SB) 4/95 (Pt.)—16998/HUD, dated 17.05.1999.

2.2. It is asserted that though the respondent Nos.4 and 7 (Dwarikanath Nayak and Rashmi Ranjan Singh) did not face test held on 28.09.1997, their services have been regularised with seniority. Subsequently, 18 other similarly situated employees joined later to the respondent have been regularised. Though certain juniors have been regularised in service, the case of the petitioner has not been considered.

2.3. Since no heed to his grievance was paid by the authority concerned, the respondent filed writ petition, O.J.C. No.8928 of 1999, which was disposed of by an Order dated 27.01.2009 with a direction to the authorities to consider the representation. The said representation