The High Court
Case Details
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK W.P.(C) No.20102 of 2025 Debashis Dash and Others ..... Petitioners Represented By Adv. - Mr. Rajib Rath -versus- State of Odisha and others ..... Opposite Parties Represented By Adv. – Ms. B.K. Sahu for O.P. No.1 to 3. Mr. Arnav Behera, Advocate for the O.P. No.4-OPSC W.P.(C) No.20297 of 2025 Nadeem Sawan ..... Petitioner Represented By Adv. - Mr. Madan Mohan Das -versus- State of Odisha and Another ..... Opposite Parties Represented By Adv. – Ms. B.K. Sahu for O.P. No.1. Mr. Arnav Behera, Advocate for the O.P. No.2-OPSC Page 1 of 18. W.P.(C) No.20355 of 2025 Leeman Acharya ..... Petitioner Represented By Adv. – Ms. Chinmayi Tripathy -versus- State of Odisha and Others ..... Opposite Parties Represented By Adv. –
Legal Reasoning
Mr. C.M. Singh for O.P. No.1 to 3. Mr. Arnav Behera, Advocate for the O.P. No.4-OPSC CORAM: THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ADITYA KUMAR MOHAPATRA Date of hearing -24.07.2025 :: Date of judgment - 18.08.2025 I.A. No.12013 of 2025 & I.A. No.12014 of 2025 in W.P.(C) No.20102 of 2025 I.A. No.12011 of 2025 in W.P.(C) No.20297 of 2025 I.A. No.12248 of 2025 in W.P.(C) No.20355 of 2025 Aditya Kumar Mohapatra, J. 1. In I.A. No.12013 of 2025, arising out of W.P.(C) No.20102 of 2025, the Petitioners have prayed for a direction to the Opposite Parties to do a retest by measuring their blood pressure afresh and permit them to compete in the next physical endurance (walking test) as well as a subsequent viva voce test which has not yet commenced taking into consideration the fact that they have Page 2 of 18. already qualified in the written test. Similarly, I.A. No.12014 of 12014 of 2025, arising out of W.P.(C) No.20102 of 2025, has been filed by the Petitioner with a prayer for a direction to the Opposite Parties to keep 9 posts of Forest Ranger and Assistant Conservator of Forests reserved for the Petitioners taking into consideration the fact that the Petitioners have already qualified in the combined written test of Forest Ranger and Assistant Conservator of Forests
Decision
till finalization of the writ petition. 2. I.A. No.12011 of 2025, arising out of W.P.(C) No.20297 of 2025, has been filed by the Petitioner with a prayer for a direction to the Opposite Parties to keep one post vacant in respect of the Petitioner till disposal of the writ petition. 3. I.A. No.12248 of 2025, arising out of W.P.(C) No.20355 of 2025, has been filed by the Petitioner with a prayer for a direction to the Opposite Parties to keep 9 posts of Forest Ranger and Assistant Conservator of Forests reserved, taking into consideration the fact that Petitioner has already qualified in the combined written test of Forest Ranger and Assistant Conservator of Forests, till disposal of the present above noted writ petition. Page 3 of 18. 4. Since the above noted interlocutory applications arise out of a common factual background and a common recruitment test and the prayer made in the above noted interlocutory applications are almost identical in nature, all the above noted interlocutory applications are being taken up for disposal by virtue of the following common order. 5. For better understanding of the factual background involved in the above noted applications, the facts involved in W.P.(C) No.20102 of 2025 is being taken up for discussion while disposing of the above noted interlocutory applications. 6. W.P.(C) No.20102 of 2025 has been filed by the 9 Petitioners jointly with a prayer for a direction to the Opposite Party No.1 and 2 to allow the Petitioners to participate in the next phase of recruitment test, i.e. Physical Endurance Test of Walking, and to permit them to participate in the viva voce test as the Petitioners have come out successful in the written test conducted by the Opposite Party No.3 and 4. The Petitioners have also prayed for issuance of writ of mandamus for declaring that the procedure of disqualifying the Petitioners solely on the basis of the advertisement under Annexure-2 and the disqualification of the Page 4 of 18. Petitioners on the basis of faulty B.P. Test (instrumental error of digital B.P. Meter) also violates Rule-8 of the Recruitment Rules, 2013 and the same is also violative of the principles contained in Article 14, 16 and 21 of the Constitution of India. The Petitioners have also prayed for quashing of their disqualification on the ground that the Petitioners were not provided with any opportunity before disqualifying them to participate in the further recruitment process. Moreover, such disqualification on the basis of blood pressure test amounts to change in the recruitment process by introducing a new clause of elimination which is dehors the conditions in the advertisement and the provisions of the Rules, 2013. 7. The genesis of the dispute involved in the above noted writ applications is based on a common set of facts. In May, 2023, the Odisha Public Service Commission (in short ‘OPSC’) published an advertisement online for recruitment to 45 posts of Assistant Conservator of Forests (Group A - JB) and 131 posts of Forest Ranger (Group-B) under Odisha Forest Service Cadre. Pursuant to the aforesaid advertisement, the Petitioners along with other eligible candidates submitted their application and after due Page 5 of 18. scrutiny of their applications they were allowed to participate in the recruitment process. In between 18.08.2024 to 28.08.2024 the written examination was conducted by the OPSC at two centres. The Petitioners along with other candidates participated in such a written examination. 8. While this was the position, on 03.07.2025, a notice was published by the OPSC announcing the schedule for the Physical Standard and Endurance Test (Walking) to be conducted from 14.07.2025 to 20.07.2025. The Petitioners were scheduled to appear in such test on 15th and 16th July, 2025. On 09.07.2025, the Petitioners downloaded physical test call letters from the OPSC website. 9. Pursuant to the aforesaid call letters to participate in the physical test, the Petitioners appeared for physical standard test. It has been pleaded that although the Petitioners fulfilled the physical standard prescribed for being selected, however, they were disqualified from participating in the Physical Standard and Endurance Test (Walking). It has also been alleged in the writ petitions that such disqualification is based on a faulty blood pressure measurement done by using digital instruments is in Page 6 of 18. violation of the advertisement and Rule-8 of the Recruitment Rules. On 16.07.2025, although the Petitioners submitted a representation via email to the Opposite Party No.4 requesting re-measurement of blood pressure using a proper instrument and seeking permission to appear in the walking test, however, no reply whatsoever was given on such representation. As a result of which, the Petitioner could not participate in the Physical Endurance Test and, as such, they were debarred from further participating in the recruitment test. Being aggrieved by such conduct of the Opposite Parties in disqualifying the Petitioners only on the basis of blood pressure measurement with the help of faulty instrument, which is contrary to the terms and conditions contained in the advertisement as well as the Recruitment Rules, 2013, the Petitioners have approached this Court by filing the present batch of writ petition. 10. Heard Mr. Rajib Rath, learned counsel for the Petitioners in W.P.(C) No.20102 of 2025; Mr. Madan Mohan Das, learned counsel for the Petitioner in W.P.(C) No.20297 of 2025; Ms. Chinmayi Tripathy, learned counsel for the Petitioner in W.P.(C) No.20355 of 2025; learned counsel for the State advanced his argument on the prayer made in the interlocutory applications on Page 7 of 18. behalf of the State-Opposite Parties, and heard Mr. Arnav Behera, learned counsel for the OPSC. Perused the writ petitions as well as the documents annexed thereto. 11. The above noted interlocutory applications have been filed with a common prayer to either allow the Petitioners to participate in the further recruitment process or, in the alternative, keep an equal number of posts reserved for the Petitioners in each of the above noted three writ petitions. 12. Mr. Rajib Rath, learned counsel for the Petitioners in W.P.(C) NO.20102 of 2025, while leading the argument on behalf of the Petitioners contended before this Court that the Petitioners, who were eligible to participate in the recruitment process pursuant to the advertisement, cleared the written test successfully. Thereafter, they were eligible to participate in the physical endurance test. Pursuant to the call letter issued to the Petitioners to participate in the physical endurance test, the Petitioners appeared on the scheduled date and time to participate in such test. However, before they could participate in the physical endurance test (walking test), the Opposite Parties in a surprise move called the Petitioners for their blood pressure measurement with the help of Page 8 of 18. digital B.P. instrument. In good faith the Petitioners cooperated with the Opposite Parties for measurement of their blood pressure. Petitioners were surprised by the result of the B.P. measurement test. Mr. Rath, at this juncture, contended that the digital B.P. instrument used by the Opposite Parties was a faulty instrument and the same did not reflect the correct reading. As a result of which, the Petitioners were disqualified on the basis of such faulty reading done by the B.P. instrument. 13. In the aforesaid context, Mr. Rath referred to Clause-5 of the advertisement at Annexure-2 to the writ petition. While referring to Clause-5 of the advertisement, learned counsel for the Petitioner demonstrated that nowhere in the said clause it has been mentioned to measure the blood pressure of the candidates. This Court on a careful scrutiny of Clasue-5 of the advertisement found that although the physical standard of candidates have been clearly mentioned in the said clause, however, nowhere in the said clause there is any provision with regard to measurement of the B.P. reading of the candidates. As such, learned counsel for the Petitioners argued that the B.P. measurement test which was done by the Opposite Parties, on the basis of which the Petitioners were Page 9 of 18. disqualified, is something which is extraneous to the terms and conditions mentioned in the advertisement. Therefore, the conduct of the Opposite Parties in disqualifying the Petitioners from participating further in the physical endurance test is highly illegal and arbitrary. 14. To establish his contention that the Petitioners have been disqualified on the basis of a test which has not been mentioned in the advertisement and that the same does not have any basis, Mr. Rath also referred to the Odisha Forest Service, Group-A (Junior Branch) Recruitment and Conditions of Service) Rules, 2013 (in short “the Rules 2013”). He further submitted that Rule-8 of the Rules, 2013 is the only rule that governs the field relating to the physical standard of the candidates. For better appreciation, the aforesaid Rule-8 of the Rules, 2013 has been quoted herein below:- “8. Physical Standard : Candidates, who qualify in the written test shall confirm to the following physical standard and test for being selected by the Commission, namely:- (i) A male candidate shall not be less than 163 shall have chest cm. measurement of at least 84 cm. expandable to at least 89 cm. in height and (ii) A female candidate shall not be less than 150 cm. shall have chest measurement of at least 79 cm. expandable to at least 84 cm. in height and Page 10 of 18. (iii) The candidates must pass the following physical endurance test of walking :- (a) Male : 25 Kms. in four hours (b) Female : 16 Kms. in four hours Notes-(a) For the purpose of this test, necessary arrangement shall be made by the Commission. An officer of the Forest Department deputed by the PCCF shall assist the Commission in conducting the The Commission shall determine the number of successful undergo candidates physical the number of vacancies. test depending upon required test. to (b) Failure of candidates to fulfill any of this rule shall the purpose of the provisions of disqualify him for appointment under these rules. (c) The Government be responsible for any injury during the test.” shall not 15. On a perusal of the Rule-8 of the Rules, 2013, this Court observed that such a rule has been incorporated to regulate the physical standard of the candidates. It provides that the candidates who have qualified the written test shall confirm to the physical standard mentioned therein and the test to be conducted by the Commission. The Commission obviously means the Odisha Public Service Commission as defined in Rule-2(1)(a) of the Rules, 2013. Moreover, the condition with regard to blood pressure measurement test could be found nowhere in the said rule. On an Page 11 of 18. overall assessment of the recruitment process, it appears that the candidates shall be first asked to appear in the written test. On becoming successful in written test, they will have to conform to the physical standard and to participate in the physical endurance test. Upon coming out successful in the physical endurance test, the candidates shall be asked to participate in the viva voce test. Thus, there is no requirement of measuring the blood pressure reading of the candidates. In view of the aforesaid position, Mr Rath as well as other learned counsels appearing for the Petitioners contended before this Court that the conduct of the Opposite Parties in declaring the Petitioners as disqualified on the basis of the blood pressure reading is highly illegal and arbitrary. 16. Per contra, Mr. Arnav Behera, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the OPSC, at the outset, contended that as per the Rules, 2013, the recruitment process is to be conducted by the OPSC. Accordingly, upon getting the intimation with regard to the vacancy position and on the request of the requisitioning department, an advertisement was published by the OPSC inviting applications from the aspiring candidates. Accordingly, a written test was conducted in accordance with the Rules, 2013 as well as Page 12 of 18. the terms and conditions reflected in the advertisement at Annexure-2. Mr. Behera further contended that the physical endurance test was being carried out by the State-Opposite Parties under the supervision of the OPSC. 17. Mr. Behera, learned counsel appearing for the OPSC further stated that during first phase of physical endurance test, it was found that a candidate fainted and collapsed while participating in the walking test. Therefore, keeping in view the safety of the candidates the State-Opposite Parties measured the blood pressure reading of the candidates before the selected candidates could participate in the physical endurance test. It is only those candidates whose B.P. reading was normal were allowed to participate in the physical endurance test. In such view of the matter, learned counsel for the OPSC contended that the Opposite Parties have not committed any illegality in measuring the blood pressure of the candidates before they could participate in the physical endurance test. Moreover, such test being in larger public interest and in the interest of the candidates, cannot be termed as illegal and arbitrary. Thus, it was contended that the submission Page 13 of 18. made by the learned counsels for the Petitioners is absolutely baseless and vague. 18. Learned counsel for the State, in reply, supported the argument advanced by the learned counsel for the OPSC. He also submitted that although the physical endurance test was conducted by the Forest Department under the supervision of the OPSC, however, the same was being monitored by the experts. Keeping in view the untoward incident that had happened during the test, the action of the Opposite Parties cannot be faltered solely on the ground that the blood pressure measurement has not been mentioned in the advertisement as well as the in the Rules 2013. In such view of the matter, learned counsel for the Petitioner contended that the Opposite Parties have not committed any illegality. As such, prayers made in the I.A. applications are liable to be rejected in limine. 19. Having heard the learned counsels appearing for the respective parties and on a careful analysis of the factual background involved in the above noted writ petitions, this Court observed that the Petitioners have called in question the action of the Opposite Parties in disqualifying the Petitioners only on the Page 14 of 18. basis of blood pressure reading of the candidates. Therefore, this Court is required to adjudicate as to whether the conduct of the Opposite Parties in disqualifying the Petitioners only on the basis of the blood pressure reading is valid in law or the same is an illegal and arbitrary conduct of the Opposite Parties while conducting the recruitment test? To answer the aforesaid question, this Court is required to examine the legal provision as to whether there was any such requirement to conduct a blood pressure monitoring test of the aspiring candidates who were found eligible in the written test conducted by the OPSC? 20. As has been referred in the preceding paragraph, this Court, on a careful scrutiny of the advertisement, found that Clause-5 of such advertisement at Annexure-2 lays down the procedure for physical endurance test. Such conditions have been extracted and inserted in the advertisement from Rule-8 of the Rules, 2013. As has been discussed, on a close scrutiny of the Clause-5 of the advertisement as well as Rule-8 of the Rules, 2013, this Court found that there is no such requirement to monitor the blood pressure of the candidates and to disqualify them from the Page 15 of 18. recruitment test solely on the basis of such blood pressure measurement. 21. Rule-8(iii) of the Rules, 2013 provides that the candidates must pass the physical endurance test of walking which has been prescribed as 25 Kms. in four hours for male candidates and 16 Kms. in four hours for female candidates. The note appended to Rule-8 of the Rules, 2013 also provides that such physical endurance test shall be conducted by the OPSC with the help of the PCCF by deputing an officer of Forest Department to assist the Commission in conducting such physical test. Thus, it appears that unless the candidates confirm to the physical standard mentioned in sub-clause (i) and (ii) and if they do not pass the test under sub- clause(iii) of Rule-8 of the Rules, 2013, the candidates shall automatically be declared disqualified. 22. Rule-11 of the 2013 Rules provides the disqualification and penalty clause. On a careful reading of Rule-11, it can be seen that the same does not provide any provision for disqualification on the ground of blood pressure measurement. 23. On a careful analysis of the factual matrix involved in the above noted batch of writ petitions, further on a close scrutiny of Page 16 of 18. the provisions contained in the Rules, 2013 as well as the terms and conditions indicated in the advertisement at Annexure-2, this Court is of the considered view that there is no such provision to disqualify a candidate only on the basis of the measurement of blood pressure of such candidates. Therefore, this Court has no hesitation in coming to a conclusion that the Opposite Parties have committed a gross error of law by not adhering to the terms and conditions of the advertisement as well as the Rules, 2013 and, as such, their conduct can very well be declared as illegal and arbitrary. 24. In the ultimate analysis of the factual as well as legal position, this Court is of the view that the Opposite Parties have not followed the rules while disqualifying the Petitioners. As such, the decision to disqualify the Petitioners from the recruitment test and preventing them from participating further in the physical endurance test (walking test) is absolutely illegal and, as such, the same is hereby quashed. While allowing the prayer of the Petitioners, this Court directs the Opposite Parties to allow the Petitioners to participate in the physical endurance test subject to the Petitioners furnishing an undertaking supported by a certificate Page 17 of 18. from a registered medical practitioner/physician that their blood pressure is normal. Such physical endurance test be conducted by the Opposite Parties within a period of four weeks from the date of communication of this order. 25. It is needless to mention here that in the event the Petitioners are found suitable in the physical endurance test, they shall be allowed to participate in the further recruitment process and the final result of the recruitment shall depend upon the performance of the Petitioners in such test. 26. In view of the aforesaid observation and direction, the Interlocutory Applications stand disposed of. Since nothing survives to be adjudicated in the pending writ petitions, the writ petitions are also disposed of in view of this judgment. (Aditya Kumar Mohapatra) Judge Orissa High Court, Cuttack The 18th August, 2025/Debasis Aech, Secretary Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed Signed by: DEBASIS AECH Reason: Authentication Location: ORISSA HIGH COURT Date: 18-Aug-2025 18:39:27 Page 18 of 18.