Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK
BIRAJA PRASANNA SATAPATHY
Brundaban Samal – Appellant
Versus
State Of Odisha – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. validity of petitioner's engagement as peon (Para 3 , 4 , 5) |
| 2. final order on writ petition (Para 7) |
JUDGMENT :
Biraja Prasanna Satapathy, J
1. This matter is taken up through Hybrid Arrangement (Virtual/Physical) Mode.
2. Heard learned counsel appearing for the Parties.
3. Petitioner has filed the present Writ Petition inter alia challenging order dtd.24.09.2021 so passed by Opposite Party No.3 under Annexure-3. Vide the said order, while rejecting the prayer of the Petitioner to get the benefit of regularization as against the post of Peon, he was allowed the minimum of the pay scale applicable to the post.
4. It is contended that Petitioner was engaged as a Peon on daily wages basis w.e.f. 20.06.2009 vide office order issued under Annexure-1. On the face of such continuance on daily wage basis, when his services was not regularized, he approached this Court by filing W.P.(C) No.25548 of 2020. This Court vide order dtd.03.12.2020 when directed Opposite Party No.3 to take a decision on the Petitioner’s claim to get the benefit of regularization, the same was rejected vide the impugned order dtd.24.09.2021 under Annexure-3, but by allowing the minimum of the pay scale
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.
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 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 reaffirmed that long-standing temporary employees, performing essential duties, must be regularized, rejecting claims of irregularity based solely on appointment processes without addressin....
Workers with perennial roles must be recognized for regularization without exploiting temporary classifications, aligning with constitutional obligations of fair treatment under employment law.
Long-term temporary employees engaged in essential work must be regularized after sustained service, as continuous unjust denial violates constitutional rights.
Long-term contingent employees are entitled to regularization after ten years of continuous service, barring any lawful justification for their ongoing temporary status.
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
