Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK
BIRAJA PRASANNA SATAPATHY
Hemanta Kumar Behera – Appellant
Versus
State of Odisha – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. regularization status of petitioners. (Para 2) |
| 2. claims for regularization based on service history. (Para 3) |
| 3. judicial observations on need for reconsideration. (Para 4 , 5) |
| 4. disposal of the writ petition. (Para 6) |
JUDGMENT :
1. Heard Mr. G.A.R. Dora, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. C.K. Pradhan, learned Addl. Govt. Advocate for the State.
3. It is contended that rest of the petitioners though were engaged prior to 12.04.1993 i.e. the cutoff date fixed by the Finance Department in its Resolution dated 15.05.1997, but instead of absorbing them in the regular establishment in terms of said resolution, petitioners were brought over to the Work Charged Establishment vide order dated 31.08.2009 under Annexure-3 and 4.
3.2. It is contended that since all the petitioners are engaged as NMRs prior to 12.04.1993 and continuing in the Work Charged Establishment in terms of order issued on 31.08.2009 under Annexure-3 and 4, in view of the recent decision of the Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of Jaggo vs. Union of India & Ors. 2024 SCC OnLine SC 3826; Shripal & Anr. vs. Nagar Nigam, Ghaziabad, 2025 SCC OnLine SC 221, as well as Dharam Singh & Ors. vs. State of U.P.
Workers with perennial roles must be recognized for regularization without exploiting temporary classifications, aligning with constitutional obligations of fair treatment under employment law.
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....
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.
Prolonged temporary employment without regularization contravenes labor rights; employers must ensure fair and stable employment as mandated by judicial principles.
Government entities must regularize long-term contractual employees in essential roles, upholding constitutional employment rights against arbitrary terminations.
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.
Regularization of employees must consider equitable treatment and the rights of long-serving individuals, given principles of fairness under the Constitution.
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....
Long-term daily wage employees, after 10 years of service, are entitled to regularization as established by Supreme Court principles in employment law.
Long-term temporary employees engaged in essential work must be regularized after sustained service, as continuous unjust denial violates constitutional rights.
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
