Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK
BIRAJA PRASANNA SATAPATHY
Khirod Chandra Dhir – Appellant
Versus
State of Odisha – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
Biraja Prasanna Satapathy, J
1. Heard Mr. B.S. Das, learned counsel for the Petitioner and Mr. P.P. Behera, learned Addl. Standing Counsel for the State.
2. The present Writ Petition has been filed inter alia challenging order dated 22.06.2022, so passed by Govt.-O.P. No.1 under Annexure-8. Vide the said order, claim of the Petitioner to get the benefit of absorption in the regular establishment has been rejected.
3. Learned counsel for the Petitioner contended that Petitioner was engaged as a daily wage Cook w.e.f. 01.11.1989 so reflected under Annexure-1-Series.
3.1. It is contended that on the face of such continuance as a daily wage cook w.e.f. 01.11.1989, Petitioner was never regularized in his services. But in terms of the Resolution issued by the Finance Department on 04.09.2012 under Annexure-5, Petitioner was granted with temporary status vide order dtd.26.11.2012 under Annexure-6.
3.2. Even though Petitioner was granted with temporary status vide order dtd.26.11.2012 under Annexure-6 and in the said order, the date of initial engagement of the Petitioner as a daily wager was shown as 01.01.1989, but when no step was taken to regularize him, Petitioner approached this
Long-term temporary employees engaged in essential work must be regularized after sustained service, as continuous unjust denial violates constitutional rights.
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 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 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 affirmed the obligations of the State to regularize long-serving employees in essential roles, emphasizing fair employment practices and adherence to constitutional provisions.
Workers with perennial roles must be recognized for regularization without exploiting temporary classifications, aligning with constitutional obligations of fair treatment under employment law.
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....
Long-term daily wage employees, after 10 years of service, are entitled to regularization as established by Supreme Court principles in employment law.
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
