Writ application filed to regularize petitioner's services. Court held that since petitioner ceased employment and 18 years lapsed, no direction for regularization can be issued. Liberty granted to approach appropriate authority via representation.
No direction for regularization issued. Liberty granted to file representation seeking employment.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
OJC No. 8738 of 2000
1
The petitioner files this writ application seeking direction to the opposite parties to allow him to continue in service and also to regularize his services in accordance with law.
Mr. A.K. Nayak, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that since the petitioner is continuing in service, his services should be regularized.
Mr. S.Mohanty, learned counsel for opposite party no.3 contends that the petitioner is no more in employment from 01.09.2000 and, therefore, the question of his regularization does not arise at this stage.
Considering the contention raised by learned counsel for the parties and after going through the record, since the petitioner is no more in employment and in the meantime 18 years have lapsed, this Court is not inclined to issue any direction for regularization of services of the petitioner. However, liberty is granted to the petitioner to move the appropriate authority, by filing representation, seeking for employment, if it is so available in law.
With the above observation and direction, the writ petition stands disposed of.
……………………………. Dr. B.R. Sarangi, J.
GDS
3 issues framed by the court
Whether the court can direct regularization of services when the petitioner is no longer in employment and 18 years have lapsed.
Whether the petitioner is entitled to continue in service.
Whether the petitioner can be directed to regularize services in accordance with law.
Mr. B. Pujari
Opposite party no.1
Opposite party no.3
Dr. B. R. Sarangi
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
