ORISSA HIGH COURT, CUTTACK
B.R.SARANGI, MURAHARI SRI RAMAN, JJ.
Swetapadma Samal – Petitioner
Versus
State of Odisha and others - Opp. Parties
W.P(C) no. 26508 of 2017
Decided On : 22-09-2023
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. facts surrounding the appointment and rules governing junior engineers (Para 1 , 2) |
| 2. arguments for entitlement under pension rules (Para 3) |
| 3. government's stance on contractual employment and pension benefits (Para 4) |
| 4. court's analysis of accrued rights under pension rules (Para 5 , 6 , 7 , 10 , 11 , 16 , 17 , 25 , 26) |
| 5. court's reasoning on retrospective application of pension rules (Para 8 , 9 , 12 , 18 , 19 , 20 , 21) |
| 6. final order directing compliance with pension rules (Para 27 , 28) |
JUDGMENT :
The petitioner, who was appointed as a Junior Engineer (Civil) on contractual basis and subsequently whose services were regularised after completion of six years, has filed this writ petition seeking to quash the order dated 21.09.2016 passed by the Odisha Administrative Tribunal, Cuttack Bench, Cuttack in O.A. No. 3422 (C) of 2012, wherein, instead of extending the benefit as prayed for by the petitioner in the Original Application, direction has been given to the opposite parties to examine with regard to applicability of the circular dated 04.04.2007 in the case of the petitioner, which was exclusively applicable to job contract and work charged employees. The petitioner has further prayed to direct the opposite parties to extend the benefit by treating the period of her service from the date of her initial engagement against a substantive vacancy of Junior Engineer and bring her to the fold of the Odisha Civil Service (Pension) Rules, 1992 and General Provident Fund (Odisha) Rules, 1938 and grant all consequential benefits, as due and admissible to her, in accordance with law.
2. The factual matrix of the case, in brief, is that the Government of Odisha in the Department of Planning and Coordination issued a circular, vide memo no. 684 (64) dated 18.01.1972, to all Departments of Government/Heads of the Department that Government have been pleased to direct to follow the procedure to be adopted with immediate effect until further orders in absorbing Engineering Personnel in various posts lying vacant in each departments. It was further instructed that employment of Engineering Personnel, i.e., Graduate Engineer and Diploma Engineer should be made year-wise in order of merit. All candidates of particular year have to be absorbed first before candidates of the following years are considered. The Planning and Coordination Department will continue to maintain register of these candidates and on receipt of requisitions for filling up of posts under various departments, the Planning and Coordination Department should recommend the names of the candidates as many as four times of the vacancies. Recruitment to all posts, i.e., Junior Engineer, Sub-Assistant Engineer, Surveyor, Tracer, Draftsman, Embankment Inspector and Work Sarkar has to be made through those departments as was being made earlier.
2.1. In exercise of the powers conferred by the proviso to Article 309 of the Constitution of India, the Governor of Odisha for the regulation of recruitment and conditions of service of persons appointed as Junior Engineers made the rules, namely, the “Odisha Junior Engineers’ Cadre (Recruitment and Condition of Service) Rules, 1972”, hereinafter to be referred as “1972 Rules”. Rule 5 thereof deals with method of recruitment. Sub-rule (2) of Rule 5 states that there shall be a committee comprising of the Chief Engineers, Roads and Buildings, Irrigation, Electricity, Public Health and Rural Engineering Organisation, the Director of Lift Irrigation and Additional Chief Engineer (Mechanical), and the Chairmanship of the Committee shall be determined according to the cadre to which recruitment is to be made. Rule-6 deals with condition of eligibility; Rule-7 deals with disqualifications; Rule 8 deals with the admission to the examination; Rule 9 deals with conduct of the selection; Rule 10 prescribes preparation and publication of the list by the Committee; Rule 11 prescribes for filling up of vacancies; Rule 14 deals with p


G.P. Doval and others v. Chief Secretary, Government of U.P. and others
S. Sumnyan and others v. Limi Niri and others
Habib Khan v. State of Uttarakhand and others
State of Rajasthan v. Kunji Raman
Jaswant Singh v. Union of India
Chairman, Railway Board and others v. C. R. Rangadhamaiah and others
Employees appointed before the introduction of new pension rules cannot be denied benefits retroactively, as their rights accrue from the date of initial appointment, affirming principles of equality....
The main legal point established in the judgment is the strict interpretation of the statutory provision under sub-rule (6) of Rule 18 of the OCS (Pension) Rules, 1992, and the court's direction for ....
State delays in regularizing services do not justify withholding pension benefits for long-serving employees; equal treatment and fair engagement practices must be upheld.
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.
The court affirmed that only the qualifying service period of Job Contractors is counted for pension eligibility, emphasizing the importance of timely legal action by the State.
Point of Law : Estoppel - estoppel has been defined to mean a bar that prevents one from asserting a claim or right that contradicts what one has said or done before or what has been legally establis....
Service continuity on ad hoc basis qualifies for pension and provident fund benefits despite regulatory amendments, emphasizing the need for equity in service recognition.
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.