IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK W.P.(C) No.19331 of 2014 Rabindra Kumar Swain & Others …. Petitioners Mr. D. Mishra, Adv. -versus- HPCL and Another …. Mr. N.C. Rout, Adv on behalf of Mr. N.K. Mishra, Sr.Adv. (for O.P. Nos.1 & 2) COROM: THE HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE BIRAJA PRASANNA SATAPATHY Order No ORDER 25.06.2026 22. 1. This matter is taken up through Hybrid Mode. 2. Heard learned counsel appearing for the parties. 3. The present Writ Petition has been filed inter alia with the following prayer: It is therefore prayed that your Lordship’s would graciously be pleased to admit the writ application, issue Rule NISI in the nature of mandamus calling upon the opposite parties to show cause as to why the Petitioners shall not be regularised in their respective employments as permanent workers and shall not be paid their arrear dues from 1994 till date and further to hold and declare that the services of the petitioners have never been handed over to any licensed contractor consequentially restraining the Opp. Party No.1-Management from compelling the petitioners to work under any private party /contractor and further be pleased to impart regular pay of scale along with other allowances and benefits as had been given to Chitaranjan Parida and Sri Hansda and direct the Opp. Party No.1- Corporation to impart all the consequential service and financial benefits and if the opposite parties failed to show cause or show sufficient cause the said Rule be made absolute and the opposite parties be directed to regularise the employments of the petitioners as permanent workers and according to release/ pay arrear wages from 1994 till date. And any other writ / writs, direct/ directs, order/ orders be passed as deem fit and proper. pray. And for this act of kindness the petitioners as in duty bound shall ever pray. 4. However, taking into account the claim raised in the present Writ Petition, liberty is granted to the Petitioners to make individual fresh representation before Opp. Party No.2 by enclosing all the relevant documents and citations in support of their claim, if any, within a period of 3(three) weeks hence. 5. It is observed that if such individual representations are filed within the aforesaid time period, Opp. Party No.2 shall do well to take a lawful decision on the same within a period of 3(three) months from the date of receipt of such representations. The order so passed by Opp. Party No.2 be communicated to one of the Petitioners. 6. With the aforesaid observation and direction, the Writ Petition stands disposed of. (Biraja Prasanna Satapathy) Judge sangita