Application under Articles 226 & 227 of Constitution of India. Gitanjali Podh .… v. A.D.M.-cum- Appellate Authority, Nuapada and others
Case Details
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK W.P.(C) No. 11630 of 2011 Application under Articles 226 & 227 of Constitution of India. Gitanjali Podh .…… Petitioner --------------- - Versus - A.D.M.-cum- Appellate Authority, Nuapada and others ...…. Opp. Parties Advocate(s) appeared in this case:- _________________________________________________________ For Petitioner : M/s. Sushanta Ku. Joshi & R.K. Dash, Advocates. For Opp. Parties : Mr. S.N. Pattnaik, Addl. Government Advocate M/s. Pabitra Kumar Nayak, H.B. Dash & A. Sahu, Advocate (for O.P. No.4) _________________________________________________________ CORAM: JUSTICE SASHIKANTA MISHRA JUDGMENT 25th July, 2024 SASHIKANTA MISHRA, J. The petitioner has approached this Court with the following prayer: Page 1 of 9 from for records “It is therefore prayed that this Hon’ble Court may graciously be pleased to admit this writ the selection petition, call committee and after perusing the same quash the selection and appointment of Opp. party No. 4 and issue a writ of mandamus directing the Opp, parties to appoint the petitioner as Anganwadi worker in respect of Keuburla Anganwadi center under Boden Panchayat Samit in the District of Nuapada; And pass any other omer/orders and/or direction/directions as this Hon’ble Court may deem just and proper; And for this act of kindness, the petitioner shall as in duty bound ever pray.” 2. The facts of the case are that pursuant to an advertisement issued by the C.D.P.O., Boden in the district of Nuapada on 05.12.2009 inviting applications for selection of Anganwadi Workers in respect of different Anganwadi Centers, the petitioner applied for engagement in Keuburla Anganwadi Center. In the selection process that followed, the petitioner and five other candidates including the present opposite party No.4 were considered. On a comparative assessment of their relative merit, the petitioner was found to have secured 48 points while the opposite party No.4 secured 51 points, which was the highest among all candidates. The other candidates secured 50 points. As such, appointment order was issued in favour Page 2 of 9 of opposite party No.4. According to the petitioner, the assessment of relative merit by the selection committee is contrary to the revised guidelines issued by the Government in Women and Child Development Department inasmuch as Clause-3 of the said guidelines provides that additional 10% of marks shall be granted to the Schedule Tribe/Schedule Caste candidates. According to the petitioner, she having secured 48% in the matriculation examination and the opposite party No.4 41%, only 10 % of the said marks i.e. 4.1 marks ought to have been added instead of 10. She therefore, filed an appeal being Misc. Appeal No. 48 of 2010 before the Addl. District Magistrate, Nuapada. The ADM vide order dated 14.10.2011 rejected the appeal as he found no
Legal Reasoning
illegality or infirmity in the method of selection adopted by the selection committee. Impugning the said order, the petitioner has approached this Court with the prayer as quoted above. 3. Counter affidavit has been filed by the State opposite parties (opposite party Nos.1 to 3) justifying the Page 3 of 9 selection of opposite party No.4. It is stated that as per the revised guidelines read with the clarification issued on 04.08.2007, 10 points are to be added to the marks secured in the matriculation examination. The opposite party No.4 having secured 41% marks in the matriculation examination was therefore, selected as adding 10 points to the said marks, her total tally came to 51 points, which is more than what the petitioner secured. 4. Counter affidavit has also been filed by the private opposite party no.4 more or less on the same lines as the State. 5.
Legal Reasoning
Heard Mr. S.K. Joshi, learned counsel for the petitioner; Mr. S.N. Pattnaik, learned Addl. Government Advocate for the State and Mr. A. Sahu, learned counsel for opposite party No.4. 6. Mr. Joshi assails the impugned order by submitting that the selection committee committed gross error in going beyond the revised guidelines dated Page 4 of 9 02.05.2007, inasmuch as, as per Clause-3 thereof the percentage of marks obtained in the matriculation examination shall be the basis of drawing a merit list among the applicants. Admittedly, the petitioner secured 48% while opposite party No.4 secured 41% marks in the matriculation examination. According to Mr. Joshi, therefore, the selection of opposite party No.4 was entire contrary to the guidelines. 7. Mr. S.N. Pattnaik, learned Addl. Government Advocate submits that the Government in Women and Child Development Department issued a clarification on 04.08.2007 wherein Clause-3 of the revised guidelines dated 02.05.2007 was specifically clarified to the effect that the SC/ST candidates will get 10 points irrespective of the percentage of marks secured in the qualifying examination. As such, no illegality was committed by the selection committee. 8. Mr. Sahu, learned counsel appearing for the private opposite party makes similar arguments as the State Counsel and submits in addition that the opposite party Page 5 of 9 No.4 being a ST candidate is entitled to 10 points being added to the marks secured by her in matriculation examination. 9. The facts of the case are not disputed. From the copy of the comparative statement, it is seen that out of five candidates, the petitioner was found to have secured 48% of marks in the matriculation examination. Further, she being an OBC candidate no further addition was made. On the other hand the opposite party No.4 was found to have secured 41% of marks in the matriculation examination and 10 points were added as she belongs to the ST category. Clause-3 of the revised guidelines dated 02.05.2007 reads as follows: “3) The minimum educational qualification for selection will be Matriculation. In the ITDA and MADA is areas, however, available, the educational qualification may be relaxed for the tribal candidates and SC candidates to Class - VIII examination from a recognized High School. if no Matriculate candidate Percentage of marks obtained in the Matriculation examination shall be the basis of drawing a merit list amongst the applicants. Page 6 of 9 In addition to the above, preferential additional percentage will be given to the following categories Scheduled Tribe/Scheduled Caste Widow Unmarried women above 35 years. - 10%(Only in rural and urban areas) - 10% -10% Orphan girl (in which case relaxation in nativity can be given) - 5% Physically Handicapped woman - 5% Destitute/Deserted Women If the candidate is intermediate or equivalent or has higher qualification. -5%” - 5% 10. These guidelines were subsequently followed by a clarification issued by the Government on 04.08.2007 specifically as regards the additional points as envisaged under clause-3 of the guidelines dated 02.05.2007. The said guidelines, inter alia, provides as follows: “1. The additional percentage of marks given for different special categories as per point 3 of the revised guidelines may be added as additional points i.e. SC/ST candidates will get 10 points irrespective of the percentage of marks secured in the qualifying examination. Similarly, for other categories, the word "percentage" is replaced by points. 2. It is further clarified that wherever the interview was conducted in any of the projects by 2.5.2007 as per the earlier guidelines, the final selection Page 7 of 9 may be done as per the old guideline of 1998 taking approval of the Zilla Parishad. 3. Anganwadi Helper or Community Organizer who fulfills the eligibility criteria and has rendered more than five years of service shall be engaged as Anganwadi Worker also in the scheduled-area even if she is not SC/ST” 11. It is therefore, abundantly clear that the word ‘percentage’ used in clause-3 of the revised guidelines dated 02.05.2007 is to be treated as ‘point’. As such, the contention advanced by Mr. Joshi that only 10% of marks i.e.4.1 ought to have been added to the marks secured in the matriculation examination cannot be accepted. In view of the clarification there can be no manner of doubt that 10 points and not percent is to be added. The opposite party No.4 having secured 41%, adding 10 points makes her the highest scoring candidate at 51 points. Perusal of the impugned order reveals that the ADM has taken note of these facts to reject the appeal. 12. From what has been narrated hereinbefore, this Court fully concurs with the finding of the ADM and therefore, finds no reason to interfere in the mater. Page 8 of 9 13.
Decision
In the result, the writ application is found to be devoid of merit and is therefore, dismissed. There shall be no order as to costs. ……..……………………. Sashikanta Mishra, Judge Orissa High Court, Cuttack. The 25th July, 2024/ A.K. Rana, P.A. Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed Signed by: AJAYA KUMAR RANA Designation: PERSONAL ASSISTANT Reason: Authentication Location: HIGH COURT OF ORISSA, CUTTACK Date: 29-Jul-2024 19:16:34 Page 9 of 9