BINAYA KUMAR NAYAK Vs. STATE OF ORISSA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioner Nos. 1 and 2, who were working as Tax Collectors and petitioner No. 3, who was working as Orderly Peon in the Notified Area Council, Kamakhyanagar, have filed this petition challenging their disengagement order dated 29.9.1995 (Annexure -7) and the order dated 25.1.2008 (Annexure -8) appointing the opposite parties 3 to 5 against the vacant posts of Tax Collectors and opposite party No. 6 against a post of Orderly Peon by the Executive Officer of the said Notified Area Council.

(2.) THE short facts of the case in hand are that as against the created posts of Tax Collector and Orderly Peon in the Notified Area Council, Kamakhyanagar, by following due procedure of selection, petitioner No. 1 (who belonged to Scheduled Caste category) and petitioner No. 2 were appointed as Tax Collectors and they joined the posts on 5.9.1992 whereas petitioner No. 3 was appointed as an Orderly Peon, who joined as such in October, 1993. The said appointments were made on daily wage basis. Prior to the appointment of the petitioners, a resolution had been made by the Notified Area Council to create posts vide Resolution No. 5 dated 16.4.1993. The said resolution was communicated to the Executive Officer of the Notified Area Council, opposite party No. 2, on 30.9.1993. Against some of the said created posts, the petitioners, who were initially appointed on ad hoc basis with stipulation of 30 days' duration, were allowed to continue in their appointments without any break because their continuance was felt necessary for collection of octorai tax.

(3.) AFTER the aforesaid order was passed, opposite party No. 6 was appointed as a Peon in the Notified Area Council, Kamakhyanagar, vide office order dated 24.12.2007 (Annexure -10).