The Court allowed a writ petition seeking regularization of the petitioner's service. Relying on Umadevi and M.L. Keshari, the Court directed regularization due to 24 years of continuous service in a sanctioned post without interruption or court interference.
Regularization of service within three months and grant of all consequential benefits.
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.
W.P.(C) No. 18333 of 2010
1
The petitioner, who has been appointed as a Sweepercum-Chaukidar in the year 1994, has filed this application seeking for a direction to regularize his service and grant all consequential benefits as due and admissible to him in accordance with law.
Mr. A.K. Sahoo, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is continuing as a Sweeper-cumChaukidar under the D.R.D.A., Angul w.e.f. 1994 and in the meantime 24 years have passed and as such, there is need of the post and pursuant to which he has been continuing in his service. Therefore, his service should be regularized against the said post. He has relied upon the judgment of the apex Court in State of Karnataka and Others v. Umadevi, 2006 (4) SCC 1, wherein in paragraph 53, the apex Court has held that the State Governments and their instrumentalities should take steps to regularize as a one-time measure the services of such irregularly appointed who have worked for ten years or more in duly sanctioned posts. Similar view has also been taken by the apex Court in State of Karnataka and others v. M.L.Keshari and others, 2010(II) OLR (SC) 982, wherein in paragraph 7 the apex Court has held as follows :
“7. It is evident from the above that there is an exception to the general principles against ‘regularization’ enunciated in Umadevi if the following conditions are fulfilled:
2
employee and continued him in service voluntarily and continuously for more than ten years.
In that view of the matter, since the petitioner is continuing against a post of Sweeper-cum-Chaukidar since last 24 years and even though his appointment is irregular, he should be regularized in service in view of the judgment of the apex Court in Umadevi (supra) and M.L.Keshari (supra).
It is of relevance to note that in a similar case, in respect of Angul Municipality, this Court vide order dated 27.11.2014 in W.P.(C) No. 26860 of 2013 directed the opposite parties to regularize the services of the petitioner therein in view of the judgments of the apex Court in Umadevi (supra) and M.L.Keshari (supra). Against the said order dated 27.11.2014 the State of Odisha, as well as Angul Municipality preferred W.A. No. 407 of 2015 which was dismissed on 19.01.2016. Against the order dated 19.01.2016 passed in W.A. No. 407 of 2015, the State as well as Angul Municipality filed S.L.P. before the apex Court and by a common order dated 13.05.2016 the S.L.P. was dismissed. Consequentially, the State authorities issued office order dated 06.06.2016 for regularizing the petitioner in the said writ application. Similar relief has already been granted to the employee of Paradeep Municipality in W.P.(C) No. 10100 of 2010 disposed of on 07.07.2017. Therefore, the
3
petitioner having same footing, benefit should be extended to him by regularizing his service as expeditiously as possible.
Mr. D.K. Pani, learned counsel for opposite party no.3 does not dispute such position.
Considering the contention raised by learned counsel for the parties and after going through the records since the petitioner is rendering service since last 24 years uninterruptedly and he has been allowed to draw house rent and other allowances as due and admissible to the post that itself indicates that there is need of the said post and as such the petitioner is continuing in service uninterruptedly for a quite long period. In view of the law laid down by the apex Court in Umadevi (supra) and M.L.Keshari (supra) and also the order of this Court, dated 27.11.2014, which has been confirmed by the apex Court so far as employees of Angul Municipality is concerned, the opposite parties are directed to regularize the service of the petitioner as expeditiously as possible preferably within a period of three months from the date of passing of this order and also grant all consequential benefit as due and admissible to him in accordance with law.
With the aforesaid observation and direction the writ petition is allowed.
Urgent certified copy be granted on proper application.
……………………..……
Dr. B.R. Sarangi, J
Ashok
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the petitioner's irregularly appointed service should be regularized after continuous service of 24 years in a sanctioned post.
Whether the petitioner is entitled to consequential benefits as per Umadevi and M.L. Keshari principles.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
State of Karnataka and Others v. UmadeviRelied on¶5
State of Karnataka and Others v. Umadevi, 2006 (4) SCC 1 · Who else cites this
State of Karnataka and others v. M.L.Keshari and othersRelied on¶6
State of Karnataka and others v. M.L.Keshari and others, 2010(II) OLR (SC) 982
Petitioner
State of Odisha
Angul Municipality
Dr. B.R. Sarangi
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
