URMILA SENAPATI Vs. STATE OF ORISSA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner has approached this Court for a direction to the opposite parties to regularise her services in the post of Trac3r and for a further direction that until such regularisation she should be paid the same pay as that of her counterparts in regular service.

(2.) THE petitioner alleges that on completion of her training as Draughtsuman (Civil) she has undergone some practical training in the office of the Chief Engineer, Minor Irrigation,Orissa, and as an appreatice trainee was continued from 1 -2 -1986 till 31 -1 -1887. The certificate of the concerned Engineer dated 18th of September, 1986, has been annexed an Annexure -2 and the certificate of the Superintending Engineer for the entire period from 1 -8 -1986 to 31 -1 -1987 has been annexed as Annaxure -1. On being relieved from the office of the Chief Engineer as an Apprentice Trainee, the petitioner's case is that she joined the office of the Executive Engineer,. Minor Irrigation Division, Cuttack, against a post of Tracer as a casual worker and is continuing as such even till today and she has been discharging her duties to the satisfaction of all concerned. In support of her such continuance, Annexure -3 series have been appended. After she completed -five years of such service, she represented before the competent authority for regularisation of her service and she was called for a test on 7 -6 -1992. To the said test along with the petitioner several other outsiders had also been called and ultimately some others were appointed and the petitioner was not appointed and hence she has filed the present writ application.

(3.) IT is urged in the writ application that the petitioner having been continued in service . though on daily wage basis for a period of more than five years, she has proved her ability and competence and she being duly qualified should have been absorbed on regular basis without being required to compete with several outsiders in the test that was held and the so -called test was merely to exclude the petitioner.