The High Court
Case Details
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK WP(C) No.18234 of 2024 Sanjib Kumar Ghatuary ..... Petitioner Represented By Adv. – Mr.Jitendra Kumar Digal State Of Odisha and others ..... Opposite Parties -versus- Represented By Adv. –
Legal Reasoning
Mr. M.R. Mohanty, AGA CORAM: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ADITYA KUMAR MOHAPATRA Order No.
Decision
ORDER 25.03.2025 03. 1. This matter is taken up through Hybrid Arrangement (Virtual /Physical Mode). 2. Heard learned counsel for the Petitioner as well as learned Additional Government Advocate for the State. Perused the Writ Petition as well as the documents annexed thereto. 3. The present Writ Petition has been filed with the following prayer : “Under the premises stated above the humblepetitioner that your fervently prays Lordships maygraciously be pleased to admit the case, call forthe relevant records, and after being heard fromthe both parties allow the writpetition Page 1 of 5. to theextent that: i. To quash the rejection order dtd 19.03.2024 under Annexure 11. ii. To issue appropriate writ by directing the Opp.Parties to appoint the petitioner asGroup-C (Jr.Clerk) Post onrehabilitation scheme. ii. To otherorder/orders, such direction/directions as deem fit and proper to the facts and circumstances ofthe case to give complete relief to thepetitioner.” pass 4. At the outset it is submitted by the learned counsel for the Petitioner that this is a 2ndround of litigation at the instance of the present Petitioner. In the first Writ Petition filed by the Petitioner bearing W.P.(C) No.25312 of 2023 was disposed of vide order dated 17.08.2023 with a direction to the Opposite Party No.4 to consider the representation of the Petitioner under Annexure-10 to the said Writ Petition within two months. Further, it was directed that in the event there are vacancies available in Group-C post then the Petitioner shall be considered against such Group-C post subject to the Petitioner fulfilling the requirement of educational qualification prescribed for such post. After disposal of the first Writ Petition, the Petitioner approached the Opposite Party No.4, the Opposite Party No.4 again rejected the case of the Petitioner vide order dated 19.03.2024 under Annexure-11 to the Writ Petition. 5. Learned Additional Government Advocate for the Page 2 of 5. State on the other hand contended that after disposal of the earlier Writ Petitions, the Opposite Parties have considered the case of the Petitioner in accordance with law and the application of the Petitioner has been rejected by passing a speaking and reasoned order. In such view of the matter, learned Additional Government Advocate submitted that the Opposite Party No.4 has not committed any illegality which would require interference of this Court in exercise of extraordinary jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. 6. Having heard learned counsels for the respective parties, on careful examination of the background facts of the present case as well as materials on record, this Court on careful analysis of the orders passed by this Court in the earlier Writ Petition, which are annexed to this Writ Petition as Annexure-10. In the first Writ Petition which was disposed of on 17.08.2023, this Court has categorically directed that the case of the Petitioner be considered under the OCS(RA) Rule, 1990 against a Group C post subject to suitability and eligibility of the Petitioner. Despite such direction, the application of the Petitioner was rejected. In the first Writ Petition, this Court referring to the order passed in the previous Writ Petition as well as the judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court and by this Court, which has been referred to herein above, once again directed the Page 3 of 5. Opposite Parties to consider the application of the Petitioner under the OCS (RA) Rule, 1990. However, the Opposite Party No.4 has rejected the application of the Petitioner in a mechanical manner and without even examining the issue involved in the present Writ Petition. On perusal of the impugned order under Annexure-11, this Court observes that the order has been passed in a mechanical manner without referring to the judgment referred by this Court while disposing of the first Writ Petition. This Court further deems it proper to mention here that the Rule 6(9) which provides for consideration of all pending applications under the new Rule was the subject matter of dispute in the case of Biswajit Swain v. State of Odisha and others in W.P.(C) No.5214 of 2021, this Court while striking out the Rule 6(9) of Rule 2020 has held the same as ultra vires to Article 14 of the Constitution of India. Thus, Rule 6(9) is non-existent in 2020 Rules. The Opposite Party No.3 is expected to be aware of the legal position and he should have taken into consideration the fact that the Rule 6(9) does not exist in the law book any further after declaration of Rule 6(9) as ultra vires. On careful analysis of the impugned order, this Court does not approve of the conduct of the Opposite Party No.4 in the manner in which the case has been dealt with by the Opposite Party No.4 in his order dated 19.03.2024 under Annexue-11 to the Writ Petition. Page 4 of 5. 7. In view of the aforesaid finding and analysis of this Court, this Court is of the considered view that the impugned rejection order under Annexure-11 is unsustainable. Accordingly the same is hereby quashed. The Petitioner is directed to approach the Opposite Party No.3 and 4 along with certified copy of the today’s order within 10 days from today. In such eventuality the Opposite Party No.3 and 4 is directed to consider the case of the Petitioner for his appointment against any vacant post befitting to the suitability and eligibility of the Petitioner within two months from the date when the Petitioner approaches Opposite Party No.3 and 4. The final order be communicated to the Petitioner within 10 days. 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 Designation: SECRETARY Reason: Authentication Location: ORISSA HIGH COURT Date: 28-Mar-2025 11:14:26 Page 5 of 5.