MOHAPATRA Vs. STATE OF ORISSA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) All Orissa Judicial Employees' Association, a body duly recognised by the Orissa High Court, vide Recognition No. 11139 dtd. 10/12/1974, and has been espousing the cause of judicial employees (except judicial officers) since its inception, has filed this writ petition through its General Secretary seeking direction to the opposite parties to implement the recommendation of the Shetty Commission in the manner directed by the apex Court in its order dtd. 7/10/2009 passed in W.P.(C) No. 1022 of 1989 (All India Judges' Association and others v. Union of India and others) under Annexure-2, within a stipulated period.

(2.) The factual matrix of the case, in precise, is that in order to improve the administration of justice in the country, a Commission was constituted under the Chairmanship of Hon'ble Justice K. Jagannatha Shetty (hereinafter to be referred as 'Shetty Commission') to give a report on the service conditions of the judicial and non-judicial staff working in the different set ups of courts in all the States and Union Territories of the country with the recommendations which is very much required for proper administration of justice in the present system in the country. Pursuant to the direction of the apex Court in W.P.(C) No.1022 of 1989 (All India Judges' Association and others v. Union of India and others), the Shetty Commission after taking into consideration the views of the concerned State Governments, High Courts of the concerned States and the Employees Unions of concerned States, submitted its report before the apex Court giving separate recommendations for all the staff of the judicial system working in the different set ups of courts in all the States and Union Territories of the country separately. So far as the State of Odisha is concerned, separate recommendations were also made.

(3.) Mr. Manoj Kumar Mishra, learned Senior Advocate appearing along with Mr. S. Senapati, learned counsel for the petitioner vehemently contended that Shetty Commission, which was constituted with an avowed objective, had made some recommendations for the benefit of the employees of the subordinate judiciary and the same were directed by the apex Court to be implemented in letter spirit. As the same has not been implemented, the members of the petitioner-association, being the beneficiaries, are grossly prejudiced because their rights have been affected. Consequentially, they have approached this Court through their association by filing the present writ petition. It is also contended that it is the solemn duty of the State to comply the directions given by the apex Court. Therefore, due to non-implementation of the recommendations made by the Shetty Commission, as mentioned above, the opposite parties have not only violated the orders passed by the apex Court, but also their conduct appears to be contumacious. Therefore, direction should be given to the opposite parties to implement the three recommendations, as mentioned above, forthwith.