The High Court
Case Details
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK W.P.(C) No.32051 of 2023 Biren Kumar Panda & Others …. Petitioners Mr. D.N. Rath, Advocate -versus- State of Odisha & Others …. Opposite Parties Mr. B. Mohanty, AGA CORAM: JUSTICE BIRAJA PRASANNA SATAPATHY Order No. ORDER 08.08.2024 07. 1. This matter is taken up through Hybrid Arrangement (Virtual/Physical) Mode.
Legal Reasoning
2. Heard learned counsel appearing for the Parties. 3. Petitioners have filed the present Writ Petition inter alia challenging the office order dtd.22.02.2023 so passed by Opposite Party No.3 under Annexure-18. Vide the said order, while extending the benefit of promotion to eligible Group-D employees including juniors to the Petitioners as against the post of Junior Assistant, Petitioners were deprived of the same. 4. It is the case of the Petitioners that even though Petitioners’ name were included in the gradation list of // 2 // Group-D employees so published under Annexure-11, but Opposite Party No.3 vide letter dtd.22.06.2022 under Annexure-12 called for the willingness and service particulars of 30 candidates belonging to UR category and 7 candidates belonging to SC & ST category vide letter dtd.08.12.2022 under Annexure-14.
Legal Reasoning
4.1. It is contended that taking into account the vacancy available in respect of Ganjam District which comes to 230, 20% of the post in terms of the provisions contained under Rule-8 of the Odisha Ministerial Service (Method of Recruitment and Conditions of Service of Junior Assistants, Senior Assistants and Section Officers in the District Offices and Offices Sub-ordinate thereto) Rules, 2019 (in short ‘Rules’) is reserved for such Group-D employees. 4.2. It is contended that even though out of 230 posts meant for Ganjam District, 46 posts were to be filled up by way of promotion, but D.E.O, Ganjam vide letter issued under Annexures-12 and 14 called for 30 UR candidates and 7 reserved category candidates. 4.3. It is contended that because of such illegal action of Opposite Party No.3 in not calling sufficient number of UR category candidates, Petitioners were deprived to get the benefit of promotion to the rank of Junior Assistant, Page 2 of 8 // 3 // even though their names were there in the gradation list of Group-D employees published under Annexure-11. 4.4. It is accordingly contended that extension of the benefit of promotion in favour of the private Opposite Parties who are admittedly junior to the Petitioners in the
Decision
gradation list vide the impugned order is not sustainable in the eye of law and it requires interference of this Court. 5. Learned Addl. Government Advocate for the State on the other hand basing on the stand taken in the counter affidavit so filed by Opposite Party No.3 contended that as against 230 vacant posts of Junior Assistant in the district of Ganjam, 46 posts were required to be filled up by way of promotion. Taking into account 80 point roster point as against those 46 vacancies to be filled up by way of promotion, 17 posts were meant for UR category, 11 posts for SC and 18 posts for ST. Taking into account the vacancies available in UR category at 17, Opposite Party No.3 vide letter dtd.22.06.2022 called for the willingness and service particulars of 30 UR category candidates from out of the gradation list published under Annexure-11 for consideration of their cases to get the benefit of promotion. Since Petitioners were not coming within those 30 candidates whose names were called for vide Annexure-12, Petitioners’ claim to get the benefit of appointment by way of promotion is not entertainable. Page 3 of 8 // 4 // Not only that private Opposite Parties have been so promoted as against the vacancies meant for reserved category candidates, even if they are juniors to the Petitioners. 5.1. It is also contended that taking into account the roster point available in UR category vis-a-vis Reserved Category candidates in the proceeding of the DPC held on 06.02.2023 under Annexure-C/3, 17 UR category candidates, 1 ST candidate and 7 SC candidates were recommended. Basing on the recommendation made by the DPC on 06.02.2023, order of promotion was issued vide office order dtd.22.02.2023 under Annexure-18, which is impugned by the present Petitioners. The stand taken in Para-11, 12 and 13 of the counter affidavit reads as follows:- “11. That it is humbly submitted that in the proceedings of the Departmental promotion committee meeting held on virtual mode for consideration of promotion of the Group-D employee working in S & ME Department under the administrative control of Dist. Education Officer, Ganjam, Berhampur held on 06.02.2023 vividly speaks that out of 410 sanctioned posts for junior Assistants, 230 posts are vacant by that time. As per the Govt. instruction issued vide Odisha Gazette Notification No. 7593/Gen dated 08.03.2019 in G.A & P.G Department and letter No.32043 the Directorate of Secondary dated 26.12.2022 of Education, Odisha the vacant post of Junior Assistants @ 20% (as nearly as) will be filled up from among the eligible Group D employees of the District. Accordingly 46 numbers of the posts of junior Assistants will be filled up by way of promotion. The selection will be from different categories as required in accordance with 80 point roster register Page 4 of 8 // 5 // taking into their seniority and qualifying in the computer skill test as per the instruction and guidelines received for the purpose vide Resolution No.13012/Gen dated 04.06.2020 in G.A & P.G Department. Copy of the proceeding dated 06.02.2023 is filed here with and marked as Annexure-C/3. 12. That, it is respectfully submitted that a detailed report of vacancy in Junior Assistant has been categorized in the said proceedings. It reveals from the proceedings dated 06.02.2023 that out of total vacancies of 46 posts for Junior Assistants, there were 17 number of posts for UR employees, 11 posts for SC, 18 posts for ST were considered for promotion as per roster register. 13. That, it reveals from the proceedings that though there were 12 candidates were available of ST in the gradation list, only 7 candidates have completed 10 years of service and were eligible for promotion to the post of Junior Assistant. Out of 7 eligible candidates only one Smt. Geeta Behera has not submitted her willingness and so out of 7, 6 employees were selected for promotion from SC category. Similarly, from ST category from out of two reserved posts, only one candidate was eligible for the promotion as the other has not been completed 10 years of his service. As such from UR category, there were 17 candidates were promoted to the post of Junior Assistant. As such all the 46 posts for junior Assistants were filled up by this proceedings dated 06.02.2023”. 6. To the stand taken in the counter affidavit, learned counsel for the Petitioners made further submission basing on the stand taken in the rejoinder affidavit. Learned counsel for the Petitioners contended that in view of the provisions contained under Rule-8 of the aforesaid 2019 Rules, 20% of the vacancies were required to be filled up and reserved category candidates placed below the petitioners in the gradation list of Group-D employees so published under Annexure-11, could not have been Page 5 of 8 // 6 // considered with extension of the benefit of promotion vide the impugned order. 6.1. It is accordingly contended that because of the illegal action of Opposite Party No.3, since Petitioners are deprived to get the benefit of appointment by way of promotion to the rank of Junior Assistant, even though they were otherwise eligible, the impugned order requires interference of this Court. 7. To the said submission of the learned counsel appearing for the Petitioners, learned Addl. Government Advocate for the State brought to the notice of this Court the provisions contained under Rule-5 of the 2019 Rules. 7.1. It is contended that as provided under Rule-5 of the Rules for both direct recruitment and promotion of candidates to the rank of Junior Assistant, reservation has to be followed. Accordingly, taking into account 80 point roster and the vacancies available in the different categories at the relevant point of time only 17 UR category candidates were eligible to get the benefit of promotion and accordingly 30 candidates were called for vide Annexure-12 and none of the 30 candidates are junior to the Petitioners. 8. Having heard learned counsel appearing for the Parties and considering the submissions made, this Court Page 6 of 8 // 7 // finds that in the gradation list of Group-D employees published under Annexure-11, Petitioners’ name were at SL. Nos.66, 67, 70, 71, 77, 78 & 79 respectively. Taking into account the vacancy available in respect of Ganjam District at 2.30, 46 posts were required to be filled up by way of promotion from amongst Group-D employees. As found from the record out of those 46 posts available to be filled up from amongst eligible Group-D employees, 17 posts were available for UR category, 11 for SC and 18 for ST category candidates. 8.1. Basing on the availability of such vacancies meant for UR category candidates at 17, D.E.O, Ganjam- Opposite Party No.3 vide letter dtd.22.06.2022 under Annexure-12 called the names of 30 UR category candidates. It is also not disputed that all those candidates who were called to face the selection vide Annexure-12 are senior to the Petitioners in UR category. From out of the said 30 UR candidates, 17 candidates were selected and appointed by way of promotion vide order dtd.22.02.2023 under Annexure-18. Private Opposite Parties have got the benefit as against vacancies meant to be filled up from reserved category candidates and they were given such benefit in terms of the provisions contained under Rule-5 of the 2019 Rules read with Rule-8. Page 7 of 8 // 8 // 8.2. In view of the aforesaid analysis, this Court finds no illegality or irregularity with regard to the selection and promotion of the private Opposite Parties to the rank of Junior Assistant vide order dtd.22.02.2023 under Annexure-18. Accordingly, this Court is not inclined to interfere with the said order and dismiss the Writ Petition. (Biraja Prasanna Satapathy) Judge Subrat Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed Signed by: SUBRAT KUMAR BARIK Reason: Authentication Location: HIGH COURT OF ORISSA, CUTTACK Date: 13-Aug-2024 13:42:44 Page 8 of 8