SAROJ KUMAR SAHOO Vs. MANAGING DIRECTOR ORISSA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner in this writ petition under Article 226 of Constitution of India has prayed for issue of a direction to the opposite parties to pay him full emoluments from the date of his termination from engagement till the reengagement and for a further direction to regularize his services with consequential benefits from the date on which his immediate junior was regularized.

(2.) THE background facts as averred in this writ petition in nut shell are as follows: The petitioner, who was an intermediate, was appointed as Depot Assistant/Junior Assistant on daily wage basis with effect from 1.4.1981 under Similipal Forest Development Corporation (SFDC) and worked efficiently and satisfactorily all through. A departmental proceeding was initiated against him for unauthorizedly availing leave and on conclusion of the inquiry, the Disciplinary Authority passed the following under on 18.7.1987.

(3.) A counter affidavit has been filed on behalf of the opposite parties wherein it is admitted that the petitioner was engaged as Depot Assistant with effect from 1.4.1981 in the erstwhile SFDC, Udala Sub -division and has subsequently worked as Junior Clerk on daily wage basis and in the departmental proceeding which was initiated against him, his services were terminated by order dated 18.7.1987 with immediate effect. It is stated in the counter affidavit that in the year 1990 specifically on 1.10.1990 the SFDC merged with Orissa Forest Corporation and a new corporation namely Orissa Forest Development Corporation Ltd. (OFDC) was formed. It is admitted that the petitioner was reengaged on daily wage basis on 21.10.1992 and the de novo inquiry continued and final order was passed on 21.8.1996 dropping the proceeding with observation that the period from the date of termination till his reengagement on 21.10.1992 be treated as continuous service for the purpose of regularization and the period from the date of termination till he joined be without back wages. It is stated in the counter affidavit that since the petitioner did not go to the appellate forum against the said order of denial of back wages and has directly approached this Court bypassing the Appellate Authority, the said prayer for back wages/ emoluments cannot be granted to him on the principle of no work no pay. It is further pleaded in the counter that he is not entitled to back wages as he was engaged on daily wage basis. It is specifically averred in the counter with reference to the petitioner's claim that his juniors have been regularized, and the said regularization was prior to the merger of the SFDC with OFDC and after the merger since there is excess of employees in the corporation, the process of retrenchment and elimination has started and as such the regularization of the petitioner cannot be possible as there is dearth of work in the Corporation. It has been specifically averred that after the merger on 1.10.1990 no regularization has been done in respect of any of the daily wage employees and as such the question of consideration of the case of the petitioner does not arise. It is finally pleaded that in the circumstances the petitioner is not entitled to any relief.