IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK
BIRAJA PRASANNA SATAPATHY, J.
Kailash Chandra Panda - Petitioner
Versus
State Of Odisha And Others – Respondents
W.P.(C ) Nos.248, 289 of 2026
Decided On : 07-03-2026
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. eligibility for pension based on prior service. (Para 4 , 5) |
| 2. state's objections to maintainability of the writ petition. (Para 6) |
| 3. court's decision to permit representation for pension benefits. (Para 7) |
| 4. summary of final conclusions and directives. (Para 8) |
| 5. order to dispose of the writ petitions. (Para 9) |
JUDGMENT :
BIRAJA PRASANNA SATAPATHY, J.
1. This matter is taken up through Hybrid Mode.
2. Heard learned counsel appearing for the parties.
3. Since the issue involved in both the cases is identical, both the matters were heard analogously and disposed of by the present common order.
4. Both the Writ Petitions have been filed inter alia seeking a direction on the Opp. Parties to extend the benefit of pension and other pensionary benefits, in terms of the provisions contained under OCS (Pension) Rules 1992.
5. It is the case of the Petitioners that Petitioners were engaged as NMR prior to the cut-off date i.e. 12.04.1993 so prescribed by the Finance Department in its resolution dt.15.05.1997.
5.1. It is contended that though the Petitioners were engaged and allowed to continue as NMR/DLR prior to 12.04.1993, but in terms of the resolution issued by the Finance Department on 15.05.1997, Petitioners were never absorbed in the regular establishment. Not only that, in terms of the decision of the Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of Secretary, State of Karnataka and Others Vs. Uma Devi Others, (2006) 4 SCC-1, no step was also taken to absorb the Petitioners in the regular establishment. Stipulation contained in Resolution dt.15.05.1997 and the decision in the case of Umadevi reads as follows:
Finance Deptt. No. 22764/F., dated the 15th May 1997
89. SUBJECT: Scheme for absorption of N.M.R./D.L.R/Job contract Workers under Regular Establishment - Preference to be given to work-charge employees.
It has been brought to the notice of Finance Department by the different Departments of Government that directives from Hon’ble Supreme Court, High Court and Orissa Administrative Tribunal have been received for preparation of a scheme to absorb the above categories of workers under regular establishment.
As per the above directive, Government have been pleased to formulate the following norms and conditions for the N.M.R/D.LR/Job contract workers.
1. Separate Gradation/Seniority list shall be prepared by the Appointment Authority for each category of workers determining the length of engagement of a particular person. The workers should have worked under the administrative control of the Department concemed directly for a minimum period of 10 years. The engagement of 240 days, in a year shall be constructed as a complete year of engagement for this purpose.
2. The workers should have been engaged prior to 12.4.1993. i.c.. prior to promulgation of ban on engagement of N.M.R/D.L.RJJob contract workers, etc.., vide Finance Department circular No. 17815-W.F.-II 180/92-F., dated the 12th April, 1993.
3. They should have the minimum educational/Technical qualification prescribed of the post against which they would be absorbed.
4. They should be within the age-limit prescribed for 1st appointment to Government service after deduction of the number of years they have worked under the Department concerned:
Provided that the age-limit can be further relaxed with the approval of Appointing Authority.
5. Absorption against the post for which regular recruitment sules have been framed will be made in relaxation of the relevant provisions by the competent authority.
6. Vancancies reserved for S.CJS.T/O.B.C/ women candidate/physically handicapped, etc., will be filled up according to reservation rules issued by Government from time to time
7. Absorption in Classes III and IV posts against the vacant posts shall be made keeping in view the austerity measures issued in F.D.O.M. No. 50791/F., dated the 10th December, 1996, read with O.M.No.4986, dated the 7th February, 1997.
8. While filling up the regular vacant posts, preference shall be given to work-c
Dharam Singh & Others Vs. State of U.P. & Another
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 held that employees regularized despite not formally joining are still entitled to pensionary benefits, emphasizing fairness in public employment rights.
Employees serving over ten years without unlawful intervention are entitled to pension benefits, even if prior appointments were irregular. Bureaucratic failure to regularize should not impede legal ....
The court ruled that employees employed for lengthy periods cannot be denied regularization of service, emphasizing principles of fairness and equality under the Constitution.
Prior service as work-charged employees must be counted towards qualifying service for pension, ensuring compliance with principles of fairness and non-discrimination.
The court ruled that employees engaged continuously for over ten years are entitled to regularization, regardless of irregular appointment status, reaffirming precedents from the Supreme Court highli....
The entitlement to pensionary benefits for long-serving employees, even if initially appointed on a temporary basis, and the obligation of the State to provide minimum benefits for dedicated service.
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.