Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK
BIRAJA PRASANNA SATAPATHY
Dillip Kumar Samal – Appellant
Versus
State of Odisha – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. challenging denial of regularization rights. (Para 2) |
| 2. petitioner’s lengthy service on adhoc basis. (Para 3) |
| 3. judicial principles on regularization. (Para 4) |
| 4. court's evaluation of petitioner’s regularization entitlement. (Para 5) |
| 5. final ruling and disposal of petition. (Para 6) |
JUDGMENT :
BIRAJA PRASANNA SATAPATHY, J.
1. Heard Mr. S. Mallik, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. C.K. Pradhan, learned Addl. Govt. Advocate for the State.
2. The present Writ Petition has been filed inter alia challenging rejection of the petitioner’s claim to get the benefit of regularization so passed by Opp. Party No.1 vide his order dated 05.08.2023 under Annexure-9.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner contended that petitioner was appointed as an adhoc Typist in the establishment of Opp. Party No.2 vide order of appointment issued on 23.03.1991 under Annexure-1. It is contended that petitioner was so appointed on adhoc basis against a regular vacant post and basing on such order, he was allowed to continue without any break in engagement.
3.1. Subsequently, vide office order dated 11.08.1995 under Annexure-3, petitioner was allowed to continue against the existing vacancy
Long-term adhoc employees have a right to regularization and benefits, as arbitrary continuation of their engagement undermines fairness and violates constitutional principles of employment.
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 reaffirmed that long-standing temporary employees, performing essential duties, must be regularized, rejecting claims of irregularity based solely on appointment processes without addressin....
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.
Regularization of employees must consider equitable treatment and the rights of long-serving individuals, given principles of fairness under the Constitution.
Long-term daily wage employees, after 10 years of service, are entitled to regularization as established by Supreme Court principles in employment law.
Continuous and uninterrupted service of temporary employees qualifies them for regularisation, as upheld by apex court judgments emphasizing fairness in employment practices.
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
