The High Court
Case Details
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK WP(C) No.11331 of 2025 Bishnu Charan Bisoi ..... Petitioner Represented By Adv. – Mr. Nihal Rath State of Odisha and others ..... Opposite Parties -versus- Represented By Adv. – Mr. J.K. Bal, AGA CORAM: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ADITYA KUMAR MOHAPATRA Order No.
Decision
ORDER 29.04.2025 01. 1. This matter is taken up through Hybrid Arrangement (Virtual /Physical Mode). 2. Heard learned counsel for the Petitioner as well as learned counsel for the State-Opposite Parties. Perused the writ petition as well as the documents annexed thereto. 3. The present writ petition has been filed by the Petitioner with the following prayers:- “It is, therefore, most humbly prayed that this Hon’ble Court may graciously be pleased Admit the writ application, to issue rule Nisi calling upon the opposite parties to show cause as to why the prayers made hereunder be not allowed, upon showing sufficient cause/no cause make the said Rule absolute, issue writ/writs in the nature of i. Mandamus directing the opp. Parties to issue promotion order in favour of the petitioner to the post of Section Officer from the date his junior Jyotibrata Page 1 of 6. Bagchi got such promotion by conducting a review DPC of the DPC dtd. 3.11.2023 within a time stipulation as fixed by this Hon’ble Court and grant all financial and service benefits. ii. And/or may pass such other writ/writs, order/orders, direction/directions as this Hon’ble Court may think fit and proper for the ends of justice. And for this act of kindness the petitioner as in duty bound shall ever pray.” 4. Learned counsel for the Petitioner, at the outset, contended that initially the Petitioner was appointed as Junior Clerk-cum- Typist vide order dated 30.08.1996 by the Collector, Keonjhar. Pursuant to the aforesaid appointment letter, the Petitioner joined in service on 02.09.1996 and submitted his joining report before the C.D.P.O., Joda. While working as such, the Petitioner was promoted to the post of Senior Clerk w.e.f. 28.01.2016. In the year 2023, another DPC was convened for consideration further promotion to the post of Senior Revenue Assistant. Accordingly, the eligible candidates were directed to submit their property statement. Since some of the eligible candidates could not submit their property statement in the HRMS Portal, the G.A. & P.G. Department vide letter 24.05.2023 extended the timeline upto 30.06.2023 for submission of property statement of the year 2022. 5. Learned counsel for the Petitioner, at this juncture, contended that although the Petitioner has submitted his Annual Property Statement, however the same has not been uploaded in HRMS Portal before DPC. He further submitted that on 19.07.2023, draft gradation list was circulated for the post of Senior Revenue Clerk. Finally, on 16.09.2023, a final gradation Page 2 of 6. list was published including the name of the Petitioner in such final gradation list. Learned counsel for the Petitioner, at this juncture, contended that the C.S.O., Khurda submitted the property statement of the Petitioner to the Opposite Party No.2 on 17.10.2023. Finally, the meeting of the DPC was convened to consider promotion to the post of Senior Revenue Clerk. At this juncture, learned counsel for the Petitioner further contended that although a list of candidates whose names have been recommended for promotion to the post of Section Officer was published on 16.11.2023, however the name of the Petitioner does not find place in that list. Learned counsel for the Petitioner at this juncture also contended that the Petitioner came to learn from the office that the case of the Petitioner has not been considered as his property statement was not uploaded in the HRMS Portal in the meantime. He further alleged that while ignoring the case of the Petitioner for promotion, some officers, who are junior to the Petitioner, have been considered and given promotion to the post of Section Officer. It was also contended that vide G.A. Department Notification dated 09.01.2024 again the timeline for submission of property statement for the year 2022 was extended upto 10.02.2024. Accordingly, on 04.01.2024, the Petitioner submitted his property statement for the year 2023 through online and on 09.01.2024, the Petitioner again submitted his property statement for the year 2022 through online. Since no decision was taken with regard to promotion of the Petitioner to the post of Section Officer, being aggrieved by such inaction, the Petitioner has approached the Opposite Party No.2 by filing a representation Page 3 of 6. on 29.01.2024. Again a reminder representation was given on 04.02.2025 with a prayer to consider the case of the Petitioner for promotion to the post of Section Officer as he has been discriminated by the Opposite Parties by giving promotion to his juniors. The Opposite Parties have failed to take any decision with regard to promotion of the Petitioner to the post of Section Officer. Being aggrieved by such conduct of the Opposite Parties, the Petitioner has approached this Court by filing the present writ petition. 6. Learned counsel for the State, on the other hand, contended that although he has not obtained any instruction, however on perusal of the averments made in the writ petition, it appears that the case of the Petitioner was not considered as his Annual Property Statement was not available in the HRMS Portal. He further contended that the DPC while considering the case of the eligible officers is required to examine the Annual Property Statement, which is required under the relevant rules. Therefore, learned counsel for the State contended that the Opposite Parties have not committed any illegality in not giving promotion to the Petitioner to the post of Section Officer. In such view of the matter, learned counsel for the State contended that the writ petition is devoid of merit and, as such, the same should be dismissed. 7. In reply to the aforesaid contention of the learned counsel for the State, learned counsel for the Petitioner drawing attention to the orders passed by this Court in similar matters, submitted that Page 4 of 6. this Court in many similar cases has given direction to the Opposite Parties to either accept the Annual Property Statement physically or to open the online HRMS Portal for a limited period of time providing an opportunity to the Petitioner to upload his Annual Property Statement. In one such case, i.e. W.P.(C) No.31038 of 2024 (Parimita Mishra v. State of Odisha and Others) decided on 13.12.2024 by a coordinate Bench of this Court, the learned coordinate Bench had given a direction to the Opposite Parties to provide an opportunity to the Petitioner to upload her Annual Property Statement by either opening the official web portal for a limited period of time giving opportunity to the Petitioner to upload her Annual Property Statement, or otherwise the Opposite Parties be accepted the hard copy of the Annual Property Statement. In the above noted case, learned coordinate Bench eventually directed the Opposite Parties for convening a review DPC to consider the case of promotion of the Petitioner as she was otherwise eligible for such post on the basis of seniority in the gradation list. 8. In the aforesaid context, learned counsel for the Petitioner further submitted that, so far the present Petitioner is concerned, his Annual Property Statement has already been uploaded in HRMS portal. Therefore, only a review DPC needs to be convened to consider the case of the Petitioner for promotion to the post of Section Officer and such promotion be given to the Petitioner by restoring his seniority above his juniors. 9. Having heard the learned counsels appearing for the Page 5 of 6. respective parties and on a careful examination of the background facts as well as the materials on record, this Court deems it proper to dispose of the writ petition at the stage of admission by taking into consideration the admitted factual position. Therefore, the present writ petition is being disposed of by directing the Opposite Parties to consider the Annual Property Statement which has already been uploaded in the meantime by the Petitioner in the HRMS web portal by convening a review DPC as expeditiously as possible, preferably within a period of six weeks from today. It is needless to mention here that in the event the Petitioner is otherwise finally eligible for such promotion, then necessary steps be taken to give promotion to the Petitioner as expeditiously as possible and while giving such promotion, the seniority of the Petitioner as per final gradation list shall also be restored by putting the Petitioner above his juniors. 10. With the aforesaid observation and direction the writ petition stands disposed of. ( A.K. Mohapatra ) Judge Debasis Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed Signed by: DEBASIS AECH Reason: Authentication Location: ORISSA HIGH COURT Date: 01-May-2025 15:04:10 Page 6 of 6.