The High Court
Case Details
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK W.P.(C) No.10614 of 2023 Sadananda Mishra and others …. Petitioners Mr. Budhadeb Routray, Sr. Advocate -versus- State of Odisha and others …. Opp. Parties Mr. N.K. Praharaj, AGA CORAM: JUSTICE A.K. MOHAPATRA Order No.
Decision
ORDER 10.04.2023 01. 1. This matter is taken up through Hybrid Arrangement (Virtual /Physical Mode). 2. Heard Mr. Budhadeb Routray, learned Senior Advocate appearing for the Petitioners as well as learned Additional Government Advocate appearing for the State-Opposite Parties. 3. The present writ petition has been filed by the Petitioners with the following prayers:- “It is, therefore, most humbly prayed that this Admit the writ application. Hon’ble Court be graciously pleased to: i) ii) iii) Call for the record. direction/directions Issue a writ in the nature of mandamus or any other writ/writs, the opposite parties to accept the training qualification of the petitioners acquired from north Eastern Police Academy, UMSAW, Meghalaya; directing iv) And further direct the opposite parties depute the petitioners for undergoing Armourer Basic Course of training in terms of Rule 11(2) and after them as Asst. completing the same, absorb // 2 // Armourer (Sepoy/Constable) in the Odisha Police Armourer Cadre within a stipulated time to be fixed by this Hon’ble Court; v) pass And/or order/orders, direction/directions as this Hon’ble Court may deems fit and proper for the ends of justice.” other such 4. At the outset, it is submitted by Mr. B. Routray, learned Senior Advocate appearing for the Petitioners that the Petitioners, who are having requisite qualification, were selected and appointed as Constables/Sepoys in Odisha Police Special Armed Forces in between 2002 to 2013. In this respect, the Service Books of the Petitioners have been annexed as Annexure-1 Series. While the matter stood thus, the Odisha Police Armourers Common Cadre for Battalions and District Establishments (Recruitment and Conditions of Service) Rules, 2012 was framed and notified in the year 2012. Referring to Rule-11(2) and 11(3) of the aforesaid Rule, 2012, Mr. Routray, learned Senior Counsel appearing for the Petitioners submitted that armourer short maintenance course (short course) and basic armourer course of training (long course) are the basic eligibility criteria to be eligible for absorption as Assistant Armourer in Odisha Armourers Police Cadre. 5. It is also contended by the learned Senior Advocate appearing for the Petitioners that the Petitioners were deputed to North Eastern Police Academy (NEPA), UMSAW, Meghalaya for undergoing Short Armourer Course of training between 2013 to 2020. He further contended that the Petitioners have successfully completed the said Short Armourer Course with valid training certificate. Such certificates have been annexed to the writ petition as Annexure-3 Series. He further contended that two constables, namely, Prasant Kumar Behera bearing Brass No.S/220 (Sl. No.48) and Prafulla Chandra Behera bearing Brass No.C/56 (Sl. No.49), who had earlier acquired a Short Armourer Course from NEPA, Meghalaya, were allowed to undergo long basic Armourer // 3 // Course training and subsequently absorbed as Assistant Armourer. 6. So far as the Petitioners are concerned, it was contended that the clarification was sought from Additional D.G. of Police Traming-cum- Director, BPSPA, Odisha by I.G. of Police, SAP, Odisha, Cuttack as to whether the Sepoys/Constables like the present Petitioners, who have undergone 12 weeks of basic Armourer Course of Training at NEPA, Meghalaya, are eligible to be considered and such raining shall be counted towards short Armourer Course of Training vide letter dated 17.01.2017. In reply to the aforesaid query vide letter dated 17.01.2017, the Additional D.G. of Police (Training)-cum-Director, BPSPA, Odisha vide letter dated 14.03.2017 clarified the position by saying that NEPA, Meghalaya has intimated that Sepoys/Constables who have undergone 12 weeks basic Armourer Course of training will be counted as Short Armourer Course of training. In such view of the matter, learned Senior Advocate appearing for the Petitioner submitted that there is absolutely no ambiguity with regard to the certificate acquired by the Petitioners by undergoing the Short Armourer Course in NEPA, Meghalaya. Accordingly, it is prayed that a direction be given to the Opposite Parties No.3 and 4 to take a decision keeping in view the aforesaid clarification as well as keeping in view the fact that two of the constables, namely, Prasant Kumar Behera and Prafulla Chandra Behera have been absorbed as Assistant Armourer earlier. 7. Learned Additional Government Advocate appearing for the State-Opposite Parties, on the other hand, submitted that since the matter is pending before the Opposite Parties No.3 and 4, the writ petition can be disposed of by directing the Opposite Parties No.3 and 4 to take a decision on the same strictly in accordance with law within a stipulated period of time. 8. Considering the contention raised by the learned counsel for the // 4 // respective parties and further keeping in view the background facts involved in the present writ petition, this Court disposes of the writ petition at the stage of admission by directing the Opposite Parties No.3 and 4 to take a final decision in the matter by taking into consideration the clarification issued by the Additional D.G. of Police (Training)- cum-Director, BPSPA, Odisha vide letter dated 14.03.2017 and also keeping in view the fact that on the basis of such training, certificate issued by the NEPA, Meghalaya, two of the Constables have been allowed to undergo the long Armourer Course and subsequently they have been absorbed as Assistant Armourer. Let the Petitioners approach the Opposite Parties No.3 and 4 with authenticated/certified copy of this order. In the event the Petitioners approach the Opposite Parties No.3 and 4, the Opposite Parties No.3 and 4 shall do well to take a final decision in the matter as has been directed hereinabove within a period of six weeks from the date the Petitioners approach the Opposite Parties No.3 and 4 along with authenticated/certified copy of this order. Any decision taken thereof shall be communicated to the Petitioners within two weeks thereafter. Opposite Parties No.3 and 4 are directed to act upon production of authenticated/certified copy of this order. Debasis ( A.K. Mohapatra) Judge