ARJUNA CHARAN PATRA Vs. STATE OF ORISSA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The Petitioners, fourteen in number, have filed this writ application with a prayer to direct the O.Ps. to regularise their services against the vacant posts, particularly Junior Stenographer and one Investigator and also other vacant posts available under the Puri Konark Development Authority (hereinafter called as 'PKD Authority') from the date of their engagement, without filling up the same from outside and with all consequential service and financial benefits.

(2.) THE facts, as delineated in the writ application, tend to reveal thus: Petitioner No. 1 having B.A. qualification with Stenography was appointed as DLR on 5.12.1990. Petitioner No. 2 having B.A., B.Ed., qualification was appointed on DLR basis to work as Clerk on 21.8.1990. Petitioner No. 3 having Matric qualification was appointed on DLR basis on 14.4 .1991. Petitioner No. 4 having Matric qualification was appointed as DLR on 22.3.1990. Petitioner No. 5 having I.A. qualification as DLR basis on 1.10.1994. Petitioner No. 6 having I.A. qualification was appointed as DLR basis on 22.10.1989. Petitioner No. 7 having B.A. qualification with Stenography was appointed as DLR basis on 29.10.1989. Petitioner No. 8 having Matric qualification was appointed as DLR on 10.4.1991. Petitioner No. 9 having Under Matric qualification was appointed as DL & Petitioner No. 10 having Under Matric qualification was appointed as DLR on 8.11.1991. Petitioner No. 11 having B.A. qualification with Stenography was appointed as DLR on 22.3.1990. Petitioner No. 12 having Matric qualification was appointed as DLR on 26.2.1988. Petitioner No. 13 having Under Matric qualification was appointed as DLR on 22.8.1988, Petitioner No. 14 having Matric qualification was appointed on 1.10.1994 as DLR, Since the date of their appointment, they have been discharging their duties sincerely, efficiently & to the utmost satisfaction of the authority. According to the Petitioners, since the date of establishment of the PKD Authority, a number of DLRs were engaged & some of them have been regularized on the basis of their seniority against different posts as per their qualification. In paragraph -7 of the writ application, the Petitioners have indicated the names of seven DLRs, who have been regularized without any interview or selection & such regularization was done solely on the basis of seniority, i.e., from the date of their engagement. On the basis of the aforesaid action of the O.Ps., the Petitioners claim for regularization of their services, as according to them, the PKD Authority in its 2nd meeting held on 27.6.1997 under Item No. 15/2 decided to absorb 16 number of DLRs in regular vacancies, taking into consideration their eligibility, qualification & experience & in consonance with the ORV Act & the Rules framed thereunder. According to the Petitioners, they had legitimate expectation that their services would be regularized very soon against the vacant posts, but the same was not done. According to them, at the time of filing of this writ application, two regular posts of Junior Stenographer & Investigator were lying vacant & apprehending that such posts would be filled up by outside candidates without regularizing their services, the Petitioners have filed the writ application for the relief indicated herein before. The Petitioners further claim that they are eligible to hold the posts,. as previously seven DLRs were regularized on the basis of seniority & qualification without any interview & the same method shpuld be adopted by the PKD Authority & they should also be regularized..

(3.) SO the PKD Authority cannot regularise the Petitioners as such, if they do not come within the scope and ambit of the said Scheme. According to Mr. Padhi, Learned Counsel for the O.Ps., the decision to regularise the services of the DLRs was taken by the PKD Authority on 27.6.1997, i.e., before receipt of the aforesaid resolution dated 15.5.1997 was passed in Annexure -E/2. Hence, the PKD Authority cannot take a decision by overlooking the resolution of the Government in Annexure - E/2. - - - -