‘What applies to goose, will apply to gander’: Why Orissa High Court backdated University worker’s regularisation to 1987

Justice Aditya Kumar Mohapatra was hearing the plea filed by Mahendra Kumar Muduli, whose regularisation was granted only with effect from March 18, 2011.

October 17, 1987, fixed as regularisation date

• The Orissa High Court held that the plea of the daily wage worker succeeded and quashed the order dated February 6, 2024, to the extent it fixes the petitioner’s effective date of regularisation as March 18, 201.
• The high court also directed that October 17, 1987, be fixed as the date of his regularisation.
• It was also added that the petitioner should be given notional benefit of retrospective regularisation till November 24, 2024 and the monetary benefits only with effect from November 25, 2024.
• The Orissa High Court further observed that, so far as the financial implications were concerned, the university would have to make appropriate budgetary allocations in that regard.
• The high court directed the state university to comply with the order within three months.

Appointed in 1987, regularised in 2011

Mahendra Kumar Muduli approached the Orissa High Court claiming that although he had been engaged by Utkal University on a daily wage basis on October 17, 1987, his services were regularised only with effect from March 18, 2011.

He argued that several other employees who were appointed along with him on daily wages had already been regularised from their original dates of entry into service, but he alone was denied the same benefit. The petitioner described this as “step-motherly treatment”.

Earlier, he had approached the high court in 2024 seeking relief. The court had then permitted him to submit a representation before the university authorities for reconsideration of his grievance.

However, according to the petitioner, despite the earlier direction, the university authorities did not grant him parity with similarly placed employees. 

He therefore again approached the Orissa High Court seeking quashing of the orders fixing his regularisation date as March 18, 2011, and prayed that his services be regularised retrospectively from October 17, 1987.

Step-motherly treatment

Appearing for the petitioner, advocate Sanjib Mohanty, argued that several persons were engaged on a daily wage basis. 

Mohanty also availed a copy of the same in which the name of his client figures all others, barring a few, came to be regularised in service with effect from the date of their entry into service, whereas his client has been meted out a step-motherly treatment, since he has been given March 18, 2011, as the date of regularisation when it should have been October 17, 1987.

The counsel also drew the attention of the court to the petitioner’s earlier round of litigation, which was disposed of on November 25, 2024.

University depends on funds for salary

Representing the university, advocate Smruti Ranjan Dash opposed the petition, contending that his client, being a state university, depends upon the funds to be given by the state government.

He pointed out that any appointments would require funds since an appointee has to be given a salary/emolument, and the same is the case when a daily wager is regularised in service since he attains the status of regular employee, and eventually, there should be amelioration of drawals. 

He told the court that though the petitioner was given an order of regularisation on February 6, 2014, he first approached this court in 2024, which was disposed of on November 25, 2024.

He added that even if regularisation is to be effective from the date of entry into service, it has to be only on a notional basis, which is broadly acceptable to this court. 

Therefore, he contended that the interference of this court is not called for, especially when the petitioner has already been given regularisation by an order of February 2, 2014, with effect from March 18, 2011.