The High Court
Case Details
Order No. 02. IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK W.P.(C) No.5262 of 2024 Debadutta Samal …. Petitioner Dr. J.K.Lenka,Advocate -versus- State of Odisha and others ….
Legal Reasoning
Opposite Parties Mr. D.Mohapatra, A.S.C. CORAM: JUSTICE A.K. MOHAPATRA
Decision
ORDER 19.03.2024 1. This matter is taken up through Hybrid Arrangement (Virtual /Physical Mode). 2. Heard learned counsel appearing for the petitioner as well as learned Additional Standing Counsel for the State Opposite Parties. Perused the writ petition as well as documents annexed thereto. 3. The present writ petition has been filed by the petitioner with the following prayers: “Under the above circumstances, the Petitioner, therefore, most humbly prays that your Lordship would be graciously pleased to direct the Opp. Party No.4 (OSSC) to finalise the ranking of the petitioner by taking into consideration his total marks obtained in the recruitment examination of ASI (Operator) as per advertisement No.3086 dt.1.10.2011 and submit the same to the Opp.Party No. 2 & 3. And further be directed the Opp.Party No. 2 & 3 to revise the gradation list accordingly and place the petitioner in appropriate position taking into consideration his total marks obtained by him and extend all consequential service benefits // 2 // as has been extended to the similarly situated employees those who were recruited along with the present petitioner.” 4. It is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that pursuant to an advertisement under Annexure-1, the petitioner submitted his candidature for appointment to the post of ASI (Operator/Mechanic) in the Odisha Police Signals Establishment. After the petitioner qualified the written examination he was called to appear in the physical test held on 12.09.2012. In the Physical test, the petitioner was initially disqualified on the ground of height, as the petitioner was less than 168cm. which is required standard as per physical test. Being aggrieved by such conduct of the Opposite party, initially the petitioner approached the Odisha Administrative Tribunal by filing O.A. No.3289 of 2018. Thereafter, pursuant an order passed by the Tribunal on 21.01.2013, the height of the petitioner was re-measured and the petitioner was selected and appointed to the post of ASI (Operator/Mechanic) vide the appointment letter dated 19.05.2014 under Annexure-3 to the writ application. 5. While the matter stood thus, the petitioner obtained information via the Right to Information Act with regard to the marks she has secured in the selection test. Accordingly, the petitioner was informed that she has secured a total of 108 marks. However, the petitioner has not been placed in the gradation list on the basis of the marks secured by him. Being aggrieved by such inaction of the Opposite Parties, the petitioner again approached the tribunal by filing the O.A. No.3289 of 2018 which was eventually transferred to this Court and re-registered as WPC(OAC) No.3289 of 2018. The aforesaid writ petition was disposed of vide order dated 08.09.2023 of a coordinate bench of this court permitting the petitioner to withdraw the writ application with liberty to // 3 // file a better application enclosing the copies of the impugned order. 6. Learned counsel for the petitioner referring to the counter affidavit filed by the Opposite Party No.3 in the above-noted writ application submitted that in Para-10 of the counter affidavit the Opposite party No.3 has categorically stated that so far as placement of the petitioner in the gradation list is concerned, the same was done on the basis of recommendation of the OSSC in order of merit. Therefore, the petitioner should have approached the OSSC instead of approaching the Opposite party No.3 for revision of position in the gradation list on the basis on the final select list prepared by OSSC. He further contended that the Opposite party No.3 in Para-10 has categorically referred to the case of one Sri Chittaranjan Das, who was recruited in the year 2003 and pursuant to the order passed by the Court his position in the final gradation list was altered on the basis of the recommendation of the OSSC in order of merit. In such view of the matter, learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the OSSC be directed to reconsider the position of the petitioner on the basis of the marks secured by him and accordingly, notice of recommendation be made to the Government for revision of a final gradation list. 7. Learned counsel for the state on the other hand submitted that the gradation list has been prepared is based on merit on the basis of recommendation made by OSSC. Therefore, it is not within the authority of the State-Opposite Parties to alter the same without any recommendation made by the OSSC. In such view of the matter, learned Additional Standing Counsel submitted that the petitioner should have approached the OSSC instead of approaching this Court or the Opposite parties for revision of the final gradation list. Accordingly, he submitted the writ application is devoid of merit and the same should be dismissed. // 4 // 8. Having heard the learned counsels appearing for the respective parties, on a careful examination of the background facts as well as materials on record, further keeping in view the facts stated in para-10 of the counter affidavit by the Opposite party No.3 in the previous writ application, this Court deems it proper to dispose of the writ application at the stage of admission by directing the OSSC to re-examine the seniority of the petitioner and accordingly a fresh decision be taken by the OSSC by taking into consideration the total marks secured by the petitioner in respect of the batch in which he was selected and recruited pursuant to the advertisement under Annexure-1. Further, it is directed that the OSSC shall prepare the final list strictly in the order of merit and on the basis of marks secured by the candidates participating in the recruitment test. It is further directed that upon such recommendation made by OSSC, State-Opposite parties shall do the needful in order to revise the final gradation list in terms of the recommendation made by the OSSC. The final decision so taken by the OSSC as well as the State- Opposite parties be intimated to the petitioner within ten days from the date of taking such decision. It is open to the OSSC to provide an opportunity of hearing to the private opposite parties in the event it is felt necessary by the OSSC that the private opposite parties are likely to be affected in case the final merit is list altered by the OSSC. 9. With the aforesaid observations/ directions, the writ application stands disposed of. Issue urgent certified copy of this order as per Rules. ( A.K. Mohapatra ) Judge Rubi Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed Signed by: RUBI BEHERA Reason: Authentication Location: High Court of Orissa Date: 15-Apr-2024 11:33:34