Orissa High Court
Jugunu Naik And Others vs State Of Odisha And Others .... Opposite ... on 13 February, 2024
Author: A.K. Mohapatra
Bench: A.K. Mohapatra
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK
W.P.(C) No.13267 of 2021
Jugunu Naik and others .... Petitioners
Mr. Bimbisar Dash, Advocate
-versus-
State of Odisha and others .... Opposite Parties
Mr. P.C. Das, A.S.C.
CORAM:
JUSTICE A.K. MOHAPATRA
ORDER
13.02.2024 Order No. I.A. No.2099 of 2024
04. 1. This matter is taken up through Hybrid Arrangement (Virtual /Physical Mode).
2. This interlocutory application has been filed by the Petitioners seeking correction of errors which have been inadvertently crept into the final order passed in the present writ petition on 05.05.2023.
3. Considering such submission, the order dated 05.05.2023 is hereby recalled. The following order is passed in the place of the order which has recalled hereinabove.
W.P.(C) No.13267 of 20214. Heard Mr. Bimbisar Dash, learned counsel appearing for the Petitioners as well as learned Additional Standing Counsel appearing for the State-Opposite Parties. Perused // 2 // the Writ Petition as well as the documents annexed thereto.
5. The present writ petition has been filed by the Petitioners with the following prayer:-
"It is therefore prayed on behalf fo the petitioners that;
A- The writ application may be allowed. B- A writ in the nature of Mandamus may be issued to the Opp. Parties to regularize the services of the petitioners from a date when they completed six years of service or at last from a date when their counterparts in Berhampur were regularized.
C- A writ in the nature of Mandamus may be issued allowing them the pay attached to the post of Group-D and the arrears flowing out from the same.
D- Such Other Order(s), Direction(s)/Writ(s) may be issued in giving complete relief to the petitioners."
6. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the Petitioners that the Government of Odisha in Health and Family Welfare Department vide letter dated 16.08.1978 intimated the Director of Health Services, Odisha, Bhubaneswar that the implementation of the scheme of NMEP, the Hon'ble Governor has been pleased to sanction and create some non-gazetted posts. He further contended that the Petitioners were appointed by the Government vide order dated 16.08.1978 (NMEP Scheme) as Inferior Field Workers (IFWs) under Urban Malaria Unit, Rourkela as // 3 // casual workers. He further contended that the Petitioners are covered under the Circular dated 15.05.1997 of the Finance Department, Government of Odisha. Accordingly, it was argued before this Court that pursuant to the Circular dated 15.05.1997, the Petitioners are to be absorbed/regularized in the post they were holding. Learned counsel for the Petitioners further contended that in due course, the Petitioners were conferred with temporary status. However, while continuing in such temporary status, the services of the Petitioners were not absorbed/regularized, as a result of which, the Petitioners have approached this Court by filing the present writ petition.
7. In course of his argument, learned counsel for the Petitioners referring to the judgment of a coordinate Bench of this Court in Bijay Kumar Behera & others v. State of Odisha & others (W.P.(C) No.38547 of 2020, decided on 27.02.2023) submitted before this Court that the persons, who were involved in the above noted writ petition, are similarly placed with the present Petitioners. The coordinate Bench while considering the case of the similarly situated persons in Bijay Kumar Behera's case (supra) have passed a detailed judgment and finally in para-17 of the judgment, the following direction has been issued:-
"The above being the settled principles of law, there is no iota of doubt that the Petitioners, who have been continuing in service for more than three decades and have already been conferred with temporary status and were // 4 // repositioned against regular Group-D vacant posts as Peon, Attendant and Sweeper, are entitled to be regularized, particularly when the persons appointed after them have already been regularized with effect from 18.09.2013. Therefore, the Opposite Parties are directed to take necessary action for regularization of the services of the Petitioners in terms of the Scheme of the Finance Department dated 04.09.2012, with retrospective effect i.e. from 18.09.2013, the date from which their counterparts under the CDMO, Ganjam were regularized. Further, the opposite parties are directed to grant all consequential service and financial benefits to the Petitioners as admissible to the posts held by them in accordance with law as expeditiously as possible, preferably within a period of three months from the date of communication of the certified copy of the Judgment."
8. Learned counsel for the Petitioners further contended that since the Petitioners stand in a similar footing with the above named Bijay Kumar Behera and others, they are entitled to the benefit flowing from the judgment in Bijay Kumar Behera's case (supra). In such view of the matter, learned counsel for the Petitioners submitted that the Opposite Party No.1 be directed to reconsider the case of the Petitioners in the light of the above named Bijay Kumar Behera's case (supra) within a stipulated period of time
9. Learned Additional Standing Counsel appearing for the State-Opposite Parties, on the other hand, contended that the Petitioners have already approached the Director, Health and Family Welfare Department, Government of Odisha by // 5 // filing a representation on 12.02.2019 under Annexure-19 to the writ petition. He further contended that the letter dated 02.08.2019 under Annexure-20 to the writ petition reveals that the Additional Director of Health Services (VBD), Odisha has written a letter to the Chief District Medical & Public Health Officer, Sundargarh with a request to enquire into the matter personally and furnish a detailed report. In such view of the matter, learned Additional Standing Counsel submitted that from the record, it appears that the matter of the Petitioners is under active consideration of the Government. It is also contended that in the event no final decision has been taken, he will have no objection in the event this Court directs the Opposite Party No.1 to take a final decision in the matter in accordance with law within a stipulated period of time.
10. Having heard the learned counsels appearing for the respective parties and on a careful examination of the background facts of the present case as well as the materials on record, this Court on a careful analysis found that the case of the Petitioners is somewhat similar to the above named Bijay Kumar Behera's case (supra).
11. In such view of the matter, this Court deems it proper to dispose of the writ petition by granting liberty to the Petitioners to approach the Opposite Party No.1 by filing a fresh detailed representation within two weeks from today along with a copy of the judgment in Bijay Kumar Behera's // 6 // case (supra). In such event the Opposite Party No.1 shall examine as to whether the Petitioners stand in a similar footing with the above named Bijay Kumar Behera and in the event the Opposite Party No.1 comes to a conclusion that the Petitioners stand in similar footing with the above named Bijay Kumar Behera and others, the Petitioners in W.P.(C) No. No.38547 of 2020, then similar benefits, as has been given to Bijay Kumar Behera and others, be also extended in favour of the Petitioners within a period of two months from the date of communication of a certified copy of this order. The final decision so taken be communicated to the Petitioners within ten days from the date of taking such decision.
12. With the aforesaid observation and direction, the writ petition stands disposed of.
( A.K. Mohapatra ) Judge Debasis Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed Signed by: DEBASIS AECH Designation: Secretary Reason: Authentication Location: OHC, CUTTACK. Date: 15-Feb-2024 19:34:01