The High Court
Case Details
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK WP(C) No. 12810 of 2023 Sangram Kumar Swain & Anr. ..... Petitioners Mr. S.K. Dash, Advocate State of Odisha &Ors. -versus- ..... CORAM: Opposite Parties Mr. C.K. Pradhan, AGA THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE BIRAJA PRASANNA SATAPATHY ORDER 20.11.2025 Order No.05 1. This matter is taken up through hybrid mode. 2.Heard Mr. S.K. Dash, learned counsel appearing for the Petitioners and Mr. C.K. Pradhan, learned Addl. Govt. Advocate appearing for the State-Opp. Parties. 3. The present writ petition has been filed inter alia with the following prayer:- “It is therefore, prayed that this Hon’ble Court may graciously be pleased to: Admit this writ petition, And Issue an appropriate Writ of like nature and Direction(s) or Order(s) to set aside the Corrigendum Dtd. 06.04.2023 vide Annexure-6 issued by Odisha Police, District Head quarters, Berhampur and further to direct the Opposite parties to give appointment to the petitioners in the post of Constables (Civil) as per the final selection list vide Notice No. 07/SSB Dtd. 05.04.2023 under Annexure-4; And Page 1 of 7. Pass such other or further orders as this Hon’ble Court may deem fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the present case.” 4. It is contended that pursuant to the advertisement issued for recruitment of Constable (Civil) in the State of Odisha by the State Selection Board, Odisha Police, Cuttack on 30.12.2022 under Annexure-1, both the Petitioners made their applications as against Berhampur Police District. It is contended that in respect of Berhampur Police District, the total vacancy was indicated at 187. 4.1. Learned counsel appearing for the Petitioners contended that after completion of the process of selection, Petitioners were found eligible to get the benefit and their names were indicated in the result published under Annexure-4 vide Roll Nos. 0400017287 & 0400017541. It is however contended that, even though Petitioners were found eligible and were duly selected, but while issuing the impugned corrigendum on 06.04.2023 under Annexure-6, it was indicated that both the Roll Nos. so belong to the Petitioners have been erroneously entered in the select list, and in their place two other Roll Nos. vide Roll No. 0400018036 & 0400019278 were selected. 4.2. Learned counsel appearing for the Petitioners contended that since Petitioners were found eligible and their names were indicated in the notice dtd.05.04.2023 so issued under Annexure-4, there was no occasion to exclude their Roll Nos. from the select list with inclusion of the other two (2) Roll Nos. in the impugned corrigendum dtd.06.04.2023. It is accordingly contended that Petitioners are eligible and entitled to get the benefit of appointment as they were found eligible in all respect. Page 2 of 7.
Legal Reasoning
5. To the submission made by the learned counsel appearing for the Petitioners, Mr. C.K. Pradhan, learned Addl. Govt. Advocate made his submission basing on the stand taken in the counter affidavit. Though it is not disputed that pursuant to the advertisement issued under Annexure-1, Petitioners were found eligible and their names were reflected in notice dtd.05.04.2023 under Annexure-4, but since subsequently it was found that two of the candidates belonging to Home Guard Category have not been selected even though they were otherwise eligible, in view of such selection of those two candidates, Petitioners were found ineligible to get the benefit and accordingly the corrigendum dtd.06.04.2023 was issued under Annexure-6. Stand taken in Para 4 of the counter affidavit reads as follows:- “4. That the averments made in paragraph 3 to 7 of the writ petition are not all true and correct. In reply to the same it is humbly submitted that the final Select List of 179 candidates were published on the Board in which their names were found place and subsequently due to the entry of two candidates belonging to Home Guard (Special Category) they lost their respective places. In Compliance to the above, it is submitted that in pursuance to State Selection Board (SSB), Odisha Police, Cuttack Advt. No.02/SSB dtd.30.12.2022, total 187 (Men-125 & Women-62) posts were advertised for recruitment in Berhampur Police District where 94-UR (63 M +31 W), 19-SC (13 M +6 W) & 74-ST (49 M+25 W) category following corrigendum No.03/SSB dtd.02.01.2023 & Advt. No.04/SSB dtd.29.01.2023. In this connection, a District Level Selection Board (DLSB) Berhampur was constituted vide State Police Headquarters, Odisha, Cuttack memo No.10483/Pers-I did.23.02.2023 and No.15498/Pers-1 dtd. 18.03.2023 memo with Superintendent of Page 3 of 7. Police, Berhampur as Chairman of the Board, Sri Nilambar Ray, OAPS-I, Dy. Commandant, 4th 1.R Battalion, Deogarh as Member- 1 and Sri Rajib Lochan Panda, OPS, SDPO, Berhampur Town as Member-II of the Board. Out of 3810 Candidates who had applied for the post, 746 (555 M 191 W) Candidates qualified in the written examination held on 26.02.2023 at Berhampur in 5 examination Centers to appear for Physical Measurement Test, Physical Efficiency Test and Document Verification. It is humbly submitted that after completion of all the process, total 214 (192 M + 22 W) Candidates were qualified and were shortlisted in the merit list. As per the vacancy & availability of suitable candidates, select list of 179 candidates including 7 Home Guards (Special Category) was initially prepared by the District Level Selection Board (DLSB)and intimated to State Selection Board(SSB), Odisha Police, Cuttack vide this office Letter No.516/Estt. dtd.31.03.2023 for publication of result. For better appreciation the copy of the proceeding for selection of candidates under the Chairmanship of Opposite Party No. 3 is annexed herewith and marked as Annexure- A/3. Accordingly, State Selection Board(SSB), Odisha Police published the Provisional result of 179 candidates for the post of Constable (Civil)-2022 in Berhampur Police District vide State Selection Board(SSB) Odisha Police, Cuttack Notice No.7/SSB
Decision
dtd.05.04.2023 under Annexure-4 to the writ petition. It is pertinent to mention here that, after publication of result, two Home Guards (HG), Home Guard Tripati Panigrahy and Home Guard Varaprasad Nagasetti came to the District Level Selection Board in grievance stating that they had cleared both written & physical tests and hence they deserve to be selected in the merit list Page 4 of 7. as per their special category quota. However, they came to know from the published result that their names have been left out. They appealed to the District Level Selection Board to address their grievance as they deserve to be selected as per their special category status. Home Guards comes under special category of reservation who are given 10% reservation of the notified vacancies in each district. As such among the 187 vacancies, 19 seats are reserved for Home Guards. A total of 33 Home Guards had applied for the Constable recruitment. Out of which 15 Home Guards had qualified for the Physical Measurement and Efficiency Test. Out of them, 9 Home Guards had qualified the Physical Measurement and Efficiency Test. These Home Guards as per reservation despite their marks, were placed in their respective categories i.e Unreserved/SC/ST. While placing, two Home Guards, one belonging to Unreserved and one belonging to SC category were inadvertently left out due to clerical error of document verification. It is respectfully submitted that to rectify this mistake, the District Level Selection Board re-examined the case on 06.04.2023 and finally placed the 2 Home Guard candidates namely Tripati Panigrahy and Varaprasad Nagasetti (Respondent No.4 & 5) respectively into the final select list. Due to this correction, the Petitioners namely Sangram Kumar Swain and Hemanta Kumar Sethi whose names had been published in the provisional results for the post of Constables and had occupied the last post in their respective categories were listed out from the selection list published vide this office Notice No.566/Estt. dtd. 06.04.2023 (Annexure-6 to the writ petition) and the petitioners were immediately informed that their names which were in Unreserved and SC category respectively had to be listed out from the provisional result for the post of Constable. As per Notice No.7/SSB dtd.05.04.2023 of State Selection Board, Odisha Police, Cuttack, it was clearly mentioned that the selection Page 5 of 7. is purely provisional and the candidates may await further correspondence in this regard from the district S.P. Therefore, the District Level Selection Board is competent to select the right & deserving candidate. Candidature of a candidate shall be cancelled, if in the opinion of the Board the candidate is not found eligible for consideration according to the eligibility criteria. In view of the above facts and circumstances, the order against the Petitioners is genuine and there is no infirmity, hence the Writ Petition to be dismissed being devoid of merit.” 5.1. It is accordingly contended that no illegality or irregularity can be found with such exclusion. 6. To the stand taken by the learned Addl. Govt. Advocate, learned counsel appearing for the Petitioners made further submission basing on the stand taken in the rejoinder affidavit. It is contended that even though in terms of the corrigendum the other two candidates were selected in Home Guard Category, but since the vacancy in terms of the advertisement issued under Annexure-1 has not yet been filled up and 8 vacancies are available as per the information provided under RTI vide Annexure-R/1, as against those 8 (eight) vacancies, Petitioners can very well be accommodated and be provided with the appointment. 7. Learned Addl. Govt. Advocate to the submission made by the learned counsel for the Petitioners contended that if 8 posts have not yet been filled up as per the RTI information, but the same having been of the year 2023, he has got no positive instruction as to whether the vacancies are available at present. 8. Having heard learned counsel appearing for the Parties and considering the submissions made, this Court finds that pursuant to the advertisement issued under Annexure-1, Petitioners made their Page 6 of 7. applications to get the benefit of appointment in respect of Berhampur Police district. It is found that in respect of Berhampur Police district, the total vacancy was indicated at 187. It is not disputed that Petitioners after participating in the selection process, their names were indicated in notice dtd.05.04.2023, so issued under Annexure-4 vide Roll Nos. 0400017287 & 0400017541. However, in the impugned corrigendum so issued on 06.04.2023 under Annexure-6, while excluding the aforesaid two Roll Nos. so belong to the Petitioners, two other Roll Nos. were included as selected one. 8.1. This Court is of the view that while selecting the other two candidates with exclusion of the Petitioners, no illegality or irregularity has been committed by the authority concerned. However, considering the fact that 8 vacancies are there as per the RTI information available under Annexure-R/1, this Court while disposing the writ petition, directs Opp. Party No. 2 to consider the claim of the Petitioners as against those 8 vacancies. This Court directs Opp. Party No. 2 to take a decision in that regard within a period of six (6) weeks from the date of receipt of this order. While taking such a decision, relevancy and effect of the interim order passed by this Court on 25.04.2023, wherein two posts of Constable (Civil) were kept vacant, be taken into consideration. 9. The writ petition accordingly stands disposed of. Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed Sneha Signed by: SNEHANJALI PARIDA Reason: Authentication Location: High Court of Orissa, Cuttack Date: 24-Nov-2025 10:40:53 (BIRAJA PRASANNA SATAPATHY) Judge Page 7 of 7.