Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK
BIRAJA PRASANNA SATAPATHY
Bikram Pradhan – Appellant
Versus
State of Odisha – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. petitioner's claims and requests for relief. (Para 1 , 2) |
| 2. petitioner's arguments for regularization based on past employment. (Para 3) |
| 3. opposite party's arguments against the claim for regularization. (Para 4) |
| 4. final direction to consider petitioner's claim within three months. (Para 5) |
| 5. conclusive disposal of the writ petition. (Para 6) |
JUDGMENT :
Biraja Prasanna Satapathy, J.
1. Heard Mr. R.P. Kar, learned Senior Counsel along with Mr. A.N. Ray, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. P.K. Panda, learned Addl. Standing Counsel for the State.
2. The present Writ Petition has been filed inter alia with the following prayer
“Under the aforesaid facts and circumstances, the petitioner prays that this Hon'ble Court may graciously be pleased to admit this petition, issue notice to the opposite parties, and after hearing both sides, further be pleased to allow the writ petition;
And issue writ of mandamus to the opposite parties to consider the representations of the petitioner vide Annexure-1 series within a period stipulated and/or regularize the services of the petitioner as a peon;
And issue writ of prohibition to the opposite parties from retrenching the petitio
The State must uphold fair employment practices, ensuring that longstanding contractual employees receive regularization if their roles are recurring and essential to the organization.
Regularization of employees must consider equitable treatment and the rights of long-serving individuals, given principles of fairness under the Constitution.
Government entities must regularize long-term contractual employees in essential roles, upholding constitutional employment rights against arbitrary terminations.
The court emphasized the importance of regularizing long-serving temporary employees to ensure compliance with fairness principles and constitutional protections in employment.
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....
The State's arbitrary rejection of a long-term temporary employee's regularization claim violates constitutional rights and obligations, emphasizing the need for fair employment practices under Artic....
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.
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
