The High Court
Case Details
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK W.P.(C) No. 26662 of 2019 Madhabika Majhi …. Petitioner Mr. R.N. Mishra, Advocate State of Odisha & Others -versus- …. Opposite Parties Mr. S. Das, ASC Mr. K.K. Swain, Adv. for O.P.3 CORAM: JUSTICE BIRAJA PRASANNA SATAPATHY Order No. ORDER 21.04.2025 09. 1. This matter is taken up through Hybrid Arrangement (Virtual/Physical) Mode. 2. Heard learned counsel appearing for the Parties. Reply to the rejoinder affidavit filed in Court be kept in record. 3. Petitioner has filed the present Writ Petition inter alia with the following prayer:- “It is therefore humbly prayed that this Hon’ble Court may graciously be pleased to admit the case, call for the records and after hearing both the parties pass the following reliefs: i) To quash the advertisement dtd. 14.12.2019 under Annexure-12in so far as it relates the post of Librarian. ii) To direct the Opposite Parties to redraw the select list of the candidates who have applied for the post of Librarian of Gop college, Gop to advertisement under annexure-1. response in // 2 // iii) To direct the opposite parties to appoint the petitioner as Librarian of Gop college, Gop with all financial and consequential benefits. iv) To pass such other orders/orders as would deem fit and proper; And for this act of kindness, the petitioner as in duty bound shall ever pray.” 4.
Legal Reasoning
It is contended that challenging the non-selection of the present Petitioner as against the post in question, Writ Petition (Civil) No.14427 of 2016 was filed by the present Petitioner. 4.1. It is contended that pursuant to the final order passed in the said Writ Petition and further order passed in the Contempt, Government in the Department of Higher Education vide letter dtd.21.10.2019 under Annexure-8 issued the following direction to the Opposite Party No.3:- “I am directed to invite a reference to this Department letter No. 19535/HE dated 23.09.2019 communicated to redraw the selection list for the post of Librarian afresh after on the above subject, wherein a decision has been taking into account the application of the petitioner submitted during invitation of application for such post and cancel the appointment of ineligible opposite party in the said case and submit compliance report to the Department. But no compliance report has been received so far. Since this is a contempt matter, compliance report in the matter may please be submitted within 3 days”. 4.2. It is contended that instead of acting on the direction issued by the Government in its letter dtd.21.10.2019, when the impugned advertisement was Page 2 of 7 // 3 // issued on 14.12.2019 to fill up the post in question, the present Writ Petition was filed challenging such action of Opposite Party No.3. 4.3. It is further contended that this Court while issuing notice of the matter vide order dtd.23.12.2019 passed an interim order by restraining Opposite Party No.3 not to give effect to the advertisement dtd.14.12.2019. 4.4. It is contended that since in terms of the earlier order passed by this Court and further order passed in the Contempt, Government-Opposite Party No.1 directed vide letter dtd.21.10.2019 under Annexure-8 to redraw the select list for the post of Librarian afresh taking into account the application of the Petitioner so submitted, and to cancel the appointment of ineligible candidates, instead of acting on the same, the impugned advertisement could not have been issued by the College on 14.12.2019 under Annexure-12 to fill up the post in question. 4.5. It is accordingly contended that Opposite Party No.3 be directed to act on the direction issued by the Government in its letter dtd.21.10.2019 under Annexure-8. 5. Mr. K.K. Swain, learned counsel appearing for Opposite Party No.3 on the other hand placing reliance on the stand taken in the counter affidavit filed by Page 3 of 7 // 4 // Opposite Party No.3 contended that basing on the direction issued by the Government in its letter dtd.21.10.2019 under Annexure-8, appointment of such ineligible candidates was cancelled by the College vide letter dtd.31.10.2019 under Annexure-G/3-Series. After cancelling the appointment of such ineligible candidates, Petitioner vide letter dtd.30.11.2019 under Annexure-H/3 was directed to attend the interview for the post of Librarian by fixing the date of interview to 08.12.2019. 5.1. It is contended that interview fixed to 08.12.2019, however was cancelled vide letter dtd.03.12.2019 under Annexure-J/3-Series, because of unavoidable circumstances and with the stand that another date of interview will be communicated to the Petitioner. But subsequently the College vide letter dtd.03.12.2019 cancelled the interview which was scheduled to be held on 08.12.2019 and when decided to fill up the post, the impugned advertisement was issued on 14.12.2019. 5.2. It is contended that since the direction issued by the Government to cancel the appointment of ineligible candidates has been complied and Petitioner though was allowed to attend the interview, but it could not take place because of unavoidable circumstances, the College in order to fill up the post, issued the impugned advertisement dtd. 14.12.2019 under Annexure-12. It Page 4 of 7 // 5 // is accordingly contended that Opposite Party No.3 be permitted to fill up the post basing on Annexure-12. 6. Learned Addl. Standing Counsel for the State on the other hand contended that since the dispute is inter se in between the Petitioner and College, this Court can pass an appropriate order basing on the available materials. 7. Having heard learned counsel appearing for the Parties and considering the submissions made, this Court finds that challenging the selection & appointment of ineligible candidates as against the post of Librarian pursuant to selection process so initiated by Opposite Party No.3, Petitioner had earlier approached this Court by filing W.P.(C) No.14427 of 2016. Pursuant to the final order passed in the said Writ Petition and further order passed in the Contempt, Government-Opposite Party No.1 vide letter dtd.21.10.2019 under Annexure-8 issued a direction on the College to re-draw the selection list for the post of Librarian afresh and to cancel the appointment of ineligible candidates so appointed as against the post. 7.1. As found from the record, pursuant to such direction issued by the Government under Annexure-8, appointment of ineligible candidates was cancelled by the College vide letter dtd.31.10.2019 under Annexure-G/3-Series. Page 5 of 7 // 6 // 7.2. As further found from the record, the College after cancelling the appointment of such ineligible candidates vide letter dtd.31.10.2019, asked the Petitioner to attend the interview on 08.12.2019 vide letter dtd.30.11.2019 under Annexure-H/3. Subsequent thereto, interview fixed to 08.12.2019 was cancelled vide letter dtd.03.12.2019 under Annexure- J/3-Series and with a condition that fresh date of interview will be communicated. 7.3. But as found from the record, instead of acting on letter dtd.03.12.2019 by fixing a fresh date of interview, the impugned advertisement was issued to fill up the post in question vide advertisement dtd.14.12.2019 under Annexure-12. 7.4. Taking into account the direction contained in letter dtd.21.10.2019 of the Government and its part compliance with cancellation of the appointment of ineligible candidates by the College and the nature of letter issued by the College to the Petitioner on 03.12.2019 under Annexure-J/3-Series, this Court while quashing the impugned advertisement so far as it relates to the post of Librarian in question, directs the College to hold the interview by fixing another date. 7.5. Since the matter is of the year 2019, this Court directs Opposite Party No.3 to conduct the interview with issuance of a fresh notice within a period of four Page 6 of 7 // 7 // (4) weeks from today. However, in order to avoid delay and taking into account the conduct of Opposite Party No.3 and the submission of the learned counsel appearing for Opposite Party No.3, this Court directs Opposite Party No.3, to hold the interview on 14.05.2025, by issuing notice to the Petitioner and other eligible candidates.
Decision
8. Accordingly, the Writ Petition stands disposed of. (Biraja Prasanna Satapathy) Judge Subrat Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed Signed by: SUBRAT KUMAR BARIK Reason: Authentication Location: HIGH COURT OF ORISSA, CUTTACK Date: 10-Jul-2025 15:12:06 Page 7 of 7