Regularization - Long-term contractual engagement cannot be labeled as "temporary"

Orissa High Court Directs Regularization of Long-Term Contractual Employees. Court orders State and OLIC to consider creating regular posts for petitioners engaged in continuous and necessary work.

In a landmark decision, the Orissa High Court, presided over by Justice Sashikanta Mishra, has directed the State of Odisha and the Orissa Lift Irrigation Corporation Ltd. (OLIC) to consider the regularization of long-term contractual employees engaged in critical and continuous functions. The judgment was delivered on November 7, 2025, addressing multiple writ petitions filed by Arabinda Acharya and others against the State of Odisha.

The petitioners, employed in various roles such as Computer Assistant, Assistant Manager, and Junior Quality Control Engineer, sought regularization after years of contractual service. The court found the nature of their work to be integral to the functioning of the institution, dismissing the State's attempt to classify the roles as temporary or project-based to avoid regularization obligations.

Justice Mishra emphasized that mere renewal of contracts does not render the engagement temporary, especially when the duties performed are recurring and essential to the institution's operations. The court highlighted the constitutional right to livelihood under Article 21, noting that temporary arrangements should not be perpetuated to evade statutory obligations.

The court further instructed the authorities to undertake an exercise to create suitable regular posts aligned with the work discharged by the petitioners, ensuring their engagement continues without disruption. The judgment sets a precedent for fair treatment of contractual employees in public institutions, advocating a humane and equitable approach in line with settled legal principles.

Bottom Line:

Contractual employees seeking regularization - Long-term contractual engagement for work that is continuous, necessary, and integral to the functioning of an institution cannot be labeled as "temporary" to deny regularization. The State cannot avoid obligations by perpetually replacing one set of temporary employees with another or by classifying enduring functions as "project-based".

Statutory provision(s): Constitution of India, Article 21

Arabinda Acharya v. State of Odisha, (Orissa) : Law Finder Doc Id # 2805566