Jitendra Kumar Sethy vs. State Of Odisha

This matter is taken up through Hybrid Arrangement (Virtual /Physical Mode).

Heard Mr.B.S.Tripathy, learned counsel for the Petitioners as well as Mr.Saswat Das, learned Additional Government Advocate for the State. Perused the Writ Petition as well as the documents annexed thereto

The Petitioners have filed the present writ application with the following prayer:

Learned counsel for the Petitioners at the outset submitted that although the Petitioners’ were working as Data Entry Operators and have been regularized in service against 49 posts of Data Entry Operators created by the state-Opposite Parties, however, no cadre Rule has been framed to regulate the service of the Data Entry Operators. He further contended that the posts against which the Petitioners have been appointed, have been created and approved by the Finance Department on 14.07.2006. Accordingly, the Petitioners were initially given appointment on 01.05.2007 initially on a consolidated monthly remuneration and they were posted at different District Treasury Offices under Opposite Party No.

Thereafter on the recommendation of the High Power Committee on 01.02.2019 the services of the Petitioners have been regularized under Annexure-4 to the Writ Petition with effect from 01.02.2019. Learned counsel for the Petitioners further contended that although the Petitioners have completed 16 years of service they have not received any financial upgradation and promotion in absence of any . Rule governing their service condition. Therefore, the learned counsel for the Petitioners contended that a direction be issued to formulate a cadre Rule governing the service condition of the Petitions.

In course of his argument, learned counsel for the Petitioners further contended that in a similar case i.e. Amit Kumar Chatterjee vrs. State of Odisha and others in W.P.(C) No.25379 of 2020, a coordinate Bench of this Court on 01.10.2020 had also directed the Government to frame a cadre Rule governing the service condition of the Data Entry Operator working in Commercial Tax and Goods and Services Tax Organisation of Odisha.

Learned Additional Government Advocate on the other hand contended that the Petitioners have not approached the State- Opposite Parties for redressal of their grievance and for framing an appropriate cadre Rule to regulate the service condition of persons similar to the Petitioners instead, they have approached this Court by filing the present Writ Petition. In such view of the matter, it was contended that in the event this Court directs the Petitioners to approach the Opposite Parties by ventilating their grievance with a further direction to the Opposite Parties to consider such grievance of the Petitioners, he will have no objection to the same.

Having heard the learned counsels for the respective parties, on a careful examination of the materials on record and further keeping in view the limited nature of grievance, this Court deems it proper to dispose of the Writ Petition at the stage of admission by granting liberty to the Petitioners to approach Opposite Party No.1 by filing a detailed representation taking therein all the grounds along with all . relevant documents within three weeks from today. In such eventuality the Opposite Party No.1 shall consider the same in accordance with law and keeping in view the procedure adopted in the case of Data Entry Operators working in Commissionerate of CT & GST Odisha and pass necessary orders on the representation of the Petitioners within a period of two months from the date of communication of certified copy of this order by the Petitioners. Final order so taken be communicated to the Petitioners within two weeks from the date of taking such decision.

With the aforesaid observation, the writ application stands disposed of.