Dismissed

Banamali Mohanty v. State of Odisha

Orissa HC4 Jul 2017WP(C)/19001/2016

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court disposed of a writ petition challenging the Odisha Administrative Tribunal's refusal to regularize NMR Drivers at par with their juniors. The Court held that since the petitioners were not the applicants in the underlying industrial dispute case, they could not claim equity with those applicants. The case was disposed of directing consideration under the 1997 State Government scheme

What did the court decide?

The writ petition was disposed of directing that the petitioners' case be considered in accordance with the 1997 scheme framed by the State Government.

Pursuant to the order dated 23.06.2017 passed by this Court, an affidavit has been filed on 30.06.2017 clarifying the query made by this Court. Learned Additional Governmen t Advocate prays for acceptance of such affidavit. This Court accepts such affidavit and perus ed the same.

The petitioners in this writ petition challenge the order dated 16.05.2016 pas sed by the Odisha Administrative Tribunal in O.A. No. 984(C) of 2009, wherein the Tribunal did not inclined to pass any order with regard to the prayer made by the petitioner for regulariz ation in service at par with their juniors.

The petitioners, who are working as NMR Drivers, were earlier before the Tribu nal in O.A. No. 3047 (C) of 2007 praying to quash the order dated 20.11.2007 whereby the junio rs of the petitioners were regularized ignoring the case of the petitioners. The said O.A. was disposed of on 10.12.2007 directing the respondents to consider the grievance of the petition ers. The grievance of the petitioners, was however rejected vide order dated 09.05.2008 statin g therein that, since pursuant to the order passed in I.D. Case No. 42 of 1991, which was conf irmed by the High Court, the applicants of the said Industrial Dispute case have been regulari zed, the petitioners cannot claim equity with such applicants. Challenging such order dated 09 .05.2008 the petitioners filed the O.A. No. 984 (C) of 2009. The Tribunal taking into consider ation the fact that the petitioners are not the applicants in I.D. Case. No. 42 of 1991 and si nce the applicants in the said Industrial Dispute case were regularized pursuant to the award by the Tribunal, which was confirmed by High Court in

OJC No. 12089 of 1999 and since the petitioners have already been regularized as Light Vehicle Driver with effect from 01.03.2009, basing on the recommendation of the Government in R.D. De partment, nothing left to be adjudicated in the said writ petition. The said order is under ch allenge in the present writ application.

Admittedly the petitioners are not the applicants in I.D. Case. No. 42 of 1991 . They are regularized pursuant to the award passed by the Tribunal, which was confirmed by th is Court. As such, the present petitioners cannot claim equity at par with such applicants. Th e opposite parties have indicated in their counter that the petitioners case will be regulariz ed as per Finance Department Resolution No.22764 dated 15.05.1997.

It is submitted that posts are lying vacant. If that be so, let the case of th e petitioners be considered in accordance with 1997 scheme framed by the State Government. The writ petition is accordingly disposed of.

Banamali Mohanty v. State of Odisha

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Banamali Mohanty v. State of Odisha

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

State of Odisha Vs Suryokanta Dwibedi

Sudam Jagadala Vs State of Odisha

Ananta Narayan Pradhan Vs State of Orissa

Nrusingha Charan Jena Vs Oat,Cuttack Bench

State of Odisha Vs Manmathnath Das

Lakshmikanta Mishra Vs State of Odisha