Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK
BIRAJA PRASANNA SATAPATHY
Sanjaya Kishore Samantaray – Appellant
Versus
State of Odisha – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
Biraja Prasanna Satapathy, J.
1. This matter is taken up through Hybrid Mode.
2. Heard learned counsel appearing for the parties.
3. The present Writ Petition has been filed inter alia challenging order dt.20.06.2022 so passed under Annexure-5 by Opp. Party No.1. Vide the said order, claim of the Petitioner to get the benefit of regularization as against the post of Peon cum Night Watcher in the establishment of Opp. party No.3 was rejected.
4. Learned counsel appearing for the Petitioner contended that Petitioner was engaged as a Night Watcher in the office of the then DRDA, Khurda, on adhoc basis with regular scale of pay w.e.f 01.12.1993 vide order dt.03.01.1994 so issued under Annexure-1. It is contended that even though Petitioner continued as a Night Watcher on adhoc basis w.e.f 1.12.1993 in terms of the order issued under Annexure-1, but when no action as taken to absorb him in the regular establishment, he approached this Court by filing W.P.(C ) No.1834 of 2022. This Court vide order dt.21.01.2022 under Annexure-4 when directed for consideration of the Petitioner’s claim to get the benefit of regularization, taking into account the decision of the Hon’ble Apex Court
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....
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.
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.
Long-term temporary employees engaged in essential work must be regularized after sustained service, as continuous unjust denial violates constitutional rights.
The court emphasized the importance of regularizing long-serving temporary employees to ensure compliance with fairness principles and constitutional protections in employment.
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.
The State must uphold fair employment practices, ensuring that longstanding contractual employees receive regularization if their roles are recurring and essential to the organization.
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....
Prolonged temporary employment without regularization contravenes labor rights; employers must ensure fair and stable employment as mandated by judicial principles.
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
