Orissa High Court
Case Details
ORISSA HIGH COURT : CUTTACK W.P.(C) No.38099 of 2021 In the matter of an Application under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India, 1950 *** Brajendra Kumar Jena Aged about 50 years Son of Late Gangadhar Jena At: Durga Prasad P.O./P.S./District: Nayagarh At present working as Inferior Filed Worker (I.F.W.) At: Malaria Department under C.D.M.O.-cum-P.H.O. of Nayagarh District. … -VERSUS- Petitioner. 1. State of Odisha Represented through the Commissioner-cum-Secretary Health and Family Welfare Department At: Lokseva Bhawan Bhubaneswar, District: Khordha. 2. Director of Health Services, Odisha Bhubaneswar, Heads of Department Building Bhubaneswar, District: Khordha. 3. Deputy Secretary to Government Health & Family Welfare Department Heads of Departments Building Bhubaneswar, District: Khordha. 4. Chief District Medial Officer, Nayagarh, At/P.O./District: Nayagarh … W.P.(C) No.38099 of 2021 Opposite parties. Page 1 of 88 Counsel appeared for the parties: For the Petitioner : M/s. Amitav Tripathy and Ashok Kumar Behera, Advocates For the Opposite parties : Mr. Arnav Behera, Additional Standing Counsel P R E S E N T: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MURAHARI SRI RAMAN Date of Hearing : 19.09.2024 :: Date of Judgment : 21.10.2024 J UDGMENT MURAHARI SRI RAMAN, J.— The petitioner, working as Inferior Field Worker on contractual basis, laid challenge against Order No.567-BBSR-MF-NVBDCP-IV-84/2021, dated 22.11.2021 of the Director of Health Services, Odisha, in refusing to regularise him in service even after six years of his engagement against vacant sanctioned post in the Office of the Chief District Medical and Public Health Officer, Nayagarh district by way of filing the instant writ petition under Article 226/227 of the Constitution of India with the following prayer(s): “The petitioners above named, therefore, pray that this Hon‟ble Court may graciously be pleased to issue Rule NISI calling upon the opposite parties to show cause as W.P.(C) No.38099 of 2021 Page 2 of 88 to why the Order dated 22.11.2021 passed by the opposite party No.2 shall not be quashed. If the opposite parties fail to show cause or show insufficient cause, Your Lordships may be pleased to quash the Order dated 22.11.2021 passed by opposite party No.2, the Director of Health Service under Annexure-12 and further be pleased to direct the opposite party No.2 to regularize the present petitioner in the post of Inferior Field Worker (IFW) in the office of CDMO, Nayagarh in the District of Nayagarh. pass and other And direction/directions as this Hon‟ble court deem fit and proper. order/orders such And for this act of kindness, the petitioner shall as in duty bound ever pray.” Facts as reflected in the writ petition: 2. The detail narration of facts as stated by the writ petitioner reveals that the petitioner was appointed temporarily as Night-watchman on daily wages in the Office of the Chief District Medical and Public Health Officer, Nayagarh-the opposite party No.4 (for convenience, “CDM & PHO”) vide Order in Memo No.7037, dated 18.06.1999. 2.1. While working as such, the petitioner participated in the walk-in-interview conducted by the CDM & PHO held on 31.05.2010 for engagement in one vacant post of Inferior Field Worker (“IFW”, for short) in the Malaria Department in response to advertisement W.P.(C) No.38099 of 2021 Page 3 of 88 published in the Notice Board of the Office and being selected he joined as IFW (Male) in the Office of Assistant District Medical Officer (Public Health), Nayagarh on 01.06.2010. 2.2. As the petitioner has been working since 1999, he claimed for regularization of his service. Though he has completed more than ten years of service, his case for regularisation in service being not considered, an Original Application bearing O.A. No.2030 of 2020 was filed before the Odisha Administrative Tribunal, Bhubaneswar which came to be disposed of vide Order dated 14.08.2013 with a direction to the CDMO for consideration of regularisation in service “against a permanent vacancy subject to eligibility for the said post in terms of qualifications and other prescribed requirements”. In pursuance thereof, citing fact that the petitioner had already completed fourteen years of service, the CDM & PHO had made correspondence on 28.11.2013 with the Additional Secretary, Health and Family Welfare Department, seeking permission to regularize the petitioner against the vacant post of Class-IV (Group D). Responding to said communication, the Deputy Secretary to Government of Odisha in Health and Family Welfare Department vide Letter No.13513—FW(IW)-156/2013/H, dated 23.05.2014 made it clear that the case of the petitioner “does not deserve any consideration for his W.P.(C) No.38099 of 2021 Page 4 of 88 regularisation in service in terms of the General Administration Department Resolution dated 17.09.2013” on the ground that “Sri Jena was appointed on 31.05.2010 against regular vacant post of IFW without observing any recruitment Rules or the Odisha Reservation of Vacancies in the Posts and Services (for Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes) Act, 1975 and Rules”. 2.3. Since joining in the vacant post of IFW in the Office of CDM & PHO on 01.06.2010, the petitioner having completed six years of service on 01.06.2016, the CDM & PHO by a Letter dated 21.07.2016 sought for necessary action to regularise his service. In response thereto, the Deputy Secretary to Government of Odisha in Health and Family Welfare Department called for certain information from CDM & PHO vide Letter dated 22.09.2016, text of which is reproduced hereunder: “Government of Odisha Health and Family Welfare Department No. 20172-FW-(IW)-101/2016/H., Date: 22.09.2016 From Sri D. N Mohapatra, Deputy Secretary to Government To The Director of Health Services, Odisha, W.P.(C) No.38099 of 2021 Page 5 of 88 Bhubaneswar. The Chief District Medical Officer. Nayagarh. Sub.: Regularisation of contractual service of Sri the DM, IFW. O/o Bajendra Kumar Jena, Nayagarh. Ref: Letter No. 2675 dated 21.07.2016 of CDMO, Nayargarh. Sir, I am directed to invite a reference to your letter noted above on the caption subject and to request that the following information may please be furnished to this Department immediately for further action at this end. 1. As transpires from order No. 5 dated 14.08.2013 in OA No. 2030/2012 filed by Brajendra Kumar Jena Vrs-State of Odisha a junior to the applicant has been allowed appointment in Class-III/Group- C post prior to the applicant. If this is true a detail be furnished. 2. Whether
Legal Reasoning
the ORV Act and rules and due procedures has been followed at the time of appointment of Sri Jena. 3. If, Sri Jena fulfils the criteria for regularisation as per G.A. Department Resolution No. 26108/Gen., dated 17.09.2013 read with Resolution No. 1066 dated 16.01.2014. 4. Whether contractual post of IFW was created on abolition of regular vacant post of IFW with concurrence of Finance Department and if so, a copy of Government order be furnished. W.P.(C) No.38099 of 2021 Page 6 of 88 5. Whether proper recruitment procedure was followed at the time of appointment & if so, an authenticated copy of advertisement & copy of selection committee meeting be furnished to this Department. Yours faithfully, Sd/- 20.09.2016 Deputy Secretary to Govt.” 2.4. On 21.11.2016 the CDM & PHO supplied required information sought for, which is as follows: “Office of the Chief District Medical Officer : Nayagarh Letter No. 4502 Date 21.11.2016 To The Deputy Secretary to Government Health & Family Welfare Department Odisha, Bhubaneswar Sub.: Regularization of Contractual Service of Sri B.K. Jena, IFW Office of the DMO, Nayagarh Ref.: Your Letter No.20172, dated 22.09.2016 Sir, 1. In inviting to your letter No. and date cited above, I am furnishing here with the following required information and documents for necessary action on the subject. That, in pursuance of the order No.30438/H, dated 27.10.2007 & 32113/H, dated 07.12.2010 of the Government of Odisha, Health & Family Welfare Department, Bhubaneswar Sri Saroj Pradhan, Retrenched Sweeper-cum- Kumar Page 7 of 88 W.P.(C) No.38099 of 2021 Attendant retrenched candidate of O.H.S.D.P. Nayagarh promoted to the Class-III/Group-C Post as Contractual M.P.H.W(M) vide this Office Order No.5219, dated 31.12.2010 (Copy enclosed). 2. As only one post is functioning in the district the O.R.V. Act not followed. the time of appointment only interview. 3. 4. 5. That, Sri Brajendra Ku. Jena in continuing as I.F.W. on contractual basis since 31.05.2010 vide this office order No. 2319, dated 31.05.2010 (Copy enclosed) as such he has been completed more than six years of service in the said post, as regards he was working as „Night watchman‟ in this office from 18.06.1999 to 30.05.2010 vide this Office Order No. 7036, dated 18.06.1999 prior to this appointment (Copy enclosed) in pursuance of Letter No.9826/H, dated 11.03.1998 of the Under Secretary, Government of Odisha, Health & Family Welfare Department, Bhubancowar. So his regularization as per Resolution No. 26108/Gen, dated 17.09.2013 and read with Resolution No. 1066, dated 16.01.2014 may be considered. The post of IFW is contractual post which has been redeployed from the Principal District, Puri vide Order No. 17014, dated 06.09.1994 of Director of Health Services, Odisha, Bhubaneswar (Copy enclosed) and since the post is functioning in the district on contractual basis. That the said post has been filled-up by the Walking-in-Interview vide this office Memo No. 2165 dated 22.05.2010 (Copy enclosed). is for favour of your kind information and This necessary action. W.P.(C) No.38099 of 2021 Page 8 of 88 Yours faithfully Sd/- 21.11.2016 Chief District Medical Officer, Nayagarh” 2.5. Despite such compliance being made by the CDMO, no action was taken by the Government, which prompted the petitioner to submit representation dated 23.09.2019. The petitioner also brought the fact to the competent authority by way of grievance petition, acting on which the Deputy Secretary Government requested the CDMO vide Letter dated 02.11.2019 to examine the case for regularisation and instructed to “furnish necessary proposal for consideration of his regularisation if satisfied this Department Letter No.13530/H., dated 08.05.2018 and General Administration and Public Grievance Department Resolution No.26108, dated 17.09.2013 read with No.1066, dated 16.01.2014”. 2.6. Responding to said instruction, the CDMO in Letter No.5315/Estt., dated 11.12.2019 furnished necessary information regarding service particulars of the petitioner for consideration of regularisation in service as he completed six years of contractual service as IFW (Group-D). The following service particulars are supplied to the Director of Public Health, Odisha, Bhubaneswar: W.P.(C) No.38099 of 2021 Page 9 of 88 2.7. The case of the petitioner is that, he being appointed on contractual basis since 31.05.2010 and in the meantime he has completed ten years of service against the vacant post. The authority concerned has followed all the required rules and procedure while appointing the present petitioner in the above post. 2.8. Attempts for consideration of regularisation in service by the Authority concerned did not yield result, which led the petitioner to approach this Court in writ petition, being W.P.(C) No.37522 of 2020, and vide Order dated 08.01.2021 the opposite party No.2 was directed to consider the representation within a period of six weeks from the date of communication of copy of the order. Accordingly the petitioner submitted the copy along with the writ petition before the opposite party No.2. As there was non-compliance of said order, the petitioner had to move this Court in contempt petition, CONTC No.3944 of 2021 which was disposed of on dated 20.07.2021. Even the same being not complied by the Authority, another contempt petition being CONTC No.6575 of 2021 was filed. During the W.P.(C) No.38099 of 2021 Page 10 of 88 pendency of this second contempt petition, i.e. CONTC No.6575 of 2021, the opposite party No.2 passed the Order dated 22.11.2021 which is impugned in this writ application. The impugned Order dated 22.11.2021 passed by the Director, Health Services, Odisha: 3. The following is the Order dated 22.11.2021 passed by the Director, Health Services, Odisha: “Directorate of Health Services : Odisha, Bhubaneswar Orders No. 567/BBSR-MF-NVBDCP-IV-84/2021 Dated 22.11.2021 Whereas one Sri Brajendra Kumar Jena, Contractual (IFW), now Inferior Field Worker working under the CDM & PHO, Nayagarh had filed a writ petition bearing No WP (C) 37522 of 2020 before the Hon‟ble High Court of Odisha praying therein to regularize his contractual Services with effect from 01.06.2017 as he had completed 06 (Six) years of Contractual Services in the said post. 2) And whereas in disposing the said writ petition the Hon‟ble High Court of Odisha vide their orders No. 02 dated 08.01.2021 have passed orders to opposite party No.2 i.e. Director of Health Services, Odisha to look into the grievance of the petitioner vide Annexure-9 and take decision, as appropriate, taking into consideration the plea taken in the writ petition within a period of 06 (Six) weeks from the date of communication of a copy of W.P.(C) No.38099 of 2021 Page 11 of 88
Decision
their orders along with copy of the writ petition by the petitioner. 3) And whereas on receipt of the above orders of the Hon‟ble High Court of Odisha the undersigned examined all the relevant document in connection with the contractual engagement of the petitioner along with the prescribed Guidelines as laid down vide Government in General Administration Department Resolution No.26108/Gen, dated 17.09.2013 dated No. 16.01.2014 for regularization of the contractual services of the Group-„C‟ & „D‟ employees of the State thoroughly. 1066/Gen., and 4) And whereas after examination of the above documents it is observed that Sri Brajendra Kumar Jena first engaged as „Night-watchman‟ on daily wage basis by CDMO, Nayagarh in his district since 18.06.1999. Then he was engaged as „Inferior Filed Worker‟ (IFW) on contractual basis vide CDMO, Nayagarh Orders No.2319 dated 31.03.2010 without following any recruitment procedure like publishing of open advertisement/following ORV Act & Rules thereof as per provisions laid down vide Government in General Administration Department Resolution No.26108/Gen., dated dated 17.09.2013 16.01.2014 the contractual services of the Group-‘C’ & ‘D’ employees of the State thoroughly. regularization No.1066/Gen. and for of 5) And whereas the Government in General Administration Department have clarified vide their Letter No.7210 dated 03.03.2021 that the order of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Uma W.P.(C) No.38099 of 2021 Page 12 of 88 Devi Judgment (dated 10.04.2006) Cases shall not be applicable to the Contractual Appointments engagements made after 11.04.1996. In the instant case the petitioner has been engaged as contractual IFW under the Chief District Medical & Public Health Officer, Nayagarh (sic., after 11.04.1996 31.05.2010). i.e. on 31.03.2010 provisions the mandatory 6) And whereas in view of the facts stated above, Sri Brajendra Kumar Jena, Contractual IFW does not for meet regularization of this contractual services as per Government in General Administration Department Resolution No.26108/Gen. dated 17.09.2013; No. 1066/Gen., dated 16.01.2014 and clarification issued on Uma Devi Case vide General Administration Department Letter No.7210/Gen. dated 03.03.2021. 7) Hence the prayer of the petitioner Sri Brajendra Kumar Jena for regularization of his contractual services after 06 (Six) years of services with effect from 01.06.2017 in the post of IFW against regular vacant posts in Nayagarh district does not merit any consideration and is hereby rejected. Director of Health Services, Odisha” Submissions of counsel for the petitioner: 4. In the aforesaid background of engagement of the petitioner on being found successful and suitable in the test— Walk-in-Interview— conducted by the Chief Medical Officer and Public Health Officer for the W.P.(C) No.38099 of 2021 Page 13 of 88 position of “IFW on contractual basis” against vacant post in connection with advertisement published in the Notice Board, Sri Amitav Tripathy, learned Advocate proceeded to submit that the reasons ascribed for rejecting the representation to consider regularization in service is unethical, unbecoming and based on jejune grounds, viz.: i. ii. iii. non-publishing of open advertisement; non-adherence to the ORV Act & Rules framed thereunder; claim for regularisation in service does not fall within the ambit of General Administration Department Resolution No.26108/Gen., dated 17.09.2013 and No.1066/Gen. dated 16.01.2014; iv. the present case falls foul of the clarification issued in the Secretary, State of Karnataka Vrs. Umadevi (3), (2006) 4 SCC 1, as per General Administration Department Letter No. 7210/Gen. dated 03.03.2021. 4.1. Moving forward with his erudition, learned counsel for the petitioner advancing further submitted that since 01.06.2010 the petitioner has been working as IFW against vacant post and he was refused regularization in service vide Letter No.13513-FW(IW)-156/2013/H., W.P.(C) No.38099 of 2021 Page 14 of 88 dated 23.05.2014 on the sole ground that “Sri Jena was appointed as IFW on 31.05.2010 against regular vacant post of IWF on daily wages basis without observing any recruitment rule and ORV Rules”. It has specifically been stated in the said letter that “the case of Sri Jena does not deserve any consideration for his regularization in service in terms of General Administration Department Resolution dated 17.09.2013”, albeit, he was allowed to continue to work as such till date. Thus, by now the petitioner acquires eligibility for consideration of regularization in service. The Authority concerned— Government of Odisha— should not play dirty games with the citizen/ employee like the petitioner, whose services have been exploited right since 1999 as “Night-watchman” and subsequently since 2010 in the vacant sanctioned post of IFW. At this stage when the petitioner is around 53 years of age, denial of his legitimate claim smacks arbitrariness and the action of Director of Health Services is tainted with flagrant violation of settled parameters laid down by the Hon‟ble Supreme Court of India as also criteria stipulated in the relevant Resolutions of the Government of Odisha. 4.2. In furtherance to what has been submitted above, it is urged by Sri Amitav Tripathy, learned Advocate that the CDM & PHO, Nayagarh in compliance of instruction for supply of documents relating to service W.P.(C) No.38099 of 2021 Page 15 of 88 particulars of the petitioner by the Director of Public Health, Odisha enclosing with Letter dated 11.12.2019 forwarded relevant records and filled up all material details required to be furnished in the Format-I and Format-II specifying that the post of IFW is a singular post. The said CDM & PHO, Nayagarh having recommended the name of the petitioner for regularisation to the Government of Odisha in Health and Family Welfare Department way back in 2019, cannot now turn around by filing counter affidavit dated 06.11.2023 before this Court supporting the ground assigned by the Director of Health Services, Odisha. Such a stance of the CDM & PHO being contradictory to his own recommendation, such a plea taken by the opposite party No.4 deserves to be deprecated and discarded. 4.3. He submitted that as there was no rules put in place at the time of initiation of the recruitment process to fill up the vacant post of IFW in the Health and Family Welfare Department, the petitioner having faced walk- in-interview conducted by the competent authority in response to advertisement cannot be said to have not being appointed by process of selection test. It was for the recruiting authority specify conditions of engagement/appointment and it is the authority who advertised for the post to have considered to provide for reservation in consonance with the Odisha W.P.(C) No.38099 of 2021 Page 16 of 88 Reservation of Vacancies in the Posts and Services (for Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes) Act, 1975 or otherwise. Nevertheless, such non-compliance, if any, by the authority-opposite party No.4 cannot be attributed to the petitioner. It is submitted that for the lapses of the opposite party No.4-authority, the petitioner, having served in the Office of Chief District Medical & Public Health Officer since 01.06.2010 as IFW, cannot be made to suffer rest of his life affecting adversely livelihood of himself and his family. 4.4. Sri Amitav Tripathy, learned Advocate further submitted that though in the impugned Order dated 22.11.2021 the Director of Health Services, Odisha has admitted engagement of the petitioner as contractual IFW under the CDM & PHO, Nayagarh on 31.03.2010 (sic., 31.05.2010, see Annexure-2), and completion of six years of service with effect from 01.06.2016 in the post of IFW against regular vacant post in Nayagarh district, he could have followed the principles propounded in very many decisions on the subject-matter and also the true spirit and purport of Resolutions of the Government of Odisha. Valiant attempt has been made by the learned Advocate for the petitioner to persuade this Court that the refusal of the petitioner to be regularised in the service is irrational, contrary to settled proposition expounded W.P.(C) No.38099 of 2021 Page 17 of 88 by the Court(s) and the denial of regularisation cannot be countenanced by any justifiable reason. 4.5. Amplifying his arguments, it is advanced by learned counsel that in Serial No.8 of Format-I endorsed by the CDM & PHO, Nayagarh enclosed to Letter No.5315/Estt., dated, Nayagarh, the 11th December, 2019, it has been mentiond that the post against which the appointment is made falls within the category of “single post”. He placed reliance on the Dr. Chakradhar Paswan Vrs. State of Bihar, AIR 1988 SC 959 = (1988) 2 SCC 214 = (1988) 3 SCR 130, to buttress his contention that the case of the petitioner falls within the category of a single or isolated post within a cadre in respect of which the rule of reservation is inapplicable. 4.6. Sri Amitav Tripathy, learned Advocate in furtherance of his argument highlighted that: i. The petitioner was selected through a process of selection by facing interview conducted by the Authority-opposite party No.4 and engaged against a vacant sanctioned post of IFW on contractual basis and has been allowed to continue by the opposite parties voluntarily and uninterruptedly till date since 01.06.2010. Hence, the case of the petitioner is bound to be considered in the light of ratio of the Judgments W.P.(C) No.38099 of 2021 Page 18 of 88 in Secretary, State of Karnataka Vrs. Umadevi (3), (2006) 4 SCC 1 and State of Karnataka Vrs. M.L. Kesari, (2010) 9 SCC 247. ii. As there was no recruitment Rules or executive instructions for recruitment of IFW in Health and Family Welfare Department, process of selection was made through advertisement published in the Notice Board of the Office of the Chief District Medical & Public Health Officer. Having participated in the process of selection, the petitioner was selected, found suitable and got engaged in the said post of IFW. iii. Similarly situated contractual engagees in different Departments of the same Government of Odisha have been regularised on completion of six to ten years of service, whereas discrimination is being meted out to the petitioner by not treating him as similarly circumstanced employee and the authority concerned should not have denied him to extend all the consequential service benefits. iv. The recommendation of the CDM & PHO, Nayagarh for regularisation of the petitioner should have been accepted. By way of filing counter affidavit he ought not to have contradicted his own recommendation. Therefore, W.P.(C) No.38099 of 2021 Page 19 of 88 it was strongly urged that the petitioner is also entitled to similar relief, as he cannot be discriminated against in a manner that would violate Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution of India. v. Based on General Administration Department Resolution dated 17.09.2013 various other Departments have already regularized services of, the contractual engagees in the categories of Group-C, as the case may be, Group-D. vi. So far as engagement of employees holding contractual posts are concerned the provisions of the ORV Act have got no application, as held by a Division Bench of this Court vide Order dated 10.05.2018 passed in the matter of State of Odisha Vrs. Jatin Kumar Das, W.P.(C) No.6661 of 20181, which pertains to regularisation in service of Data Entry Operators engaged on contractual basis in the Commercial Tax Organization. 4.7. It is, hence, submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that even though the order of the Division 1 In State of Odisha Vrs. Jatin Kumar Das, S.L.P.(C) No. 18642 of 2018 [Arising out of impugned final judgment and order dated 10.05.2018 in W.P.(C) No.6661 of 2018 passed by the High Court Of Orissa at Cuttack] the Hon‟ble Supreme Court of India has been pleased to pass the following Order on 06.08.2018: “No ground for interference is made out in exercise of our jurisdiction under Article 136 of the Constitution of India. The special leave petition is accordingly dismissed. Pending application, if any, stands disposed of.” W.P.(C) No.38099 of 2021 Page 20 of 88 Bench of this Court in Jatin Kumar Das (supra) attained finality with respect to non-adherence to the provisions of the ORV Act qua regularisation of service of contractual engagees after the State Government has lost its challenge before the Hon‟ble Supreme Court of India in the year 2018, the reason for rejecting the claim for regularisation of service on the same ground by the Director of Health Services, Odisha, vide impugned Order dated 22.11.2021 is detrimental. 4.8. Thus, he urged that the impugned Order dated 22.11.2021 cannot be sustained in the eye of law. 5. Per contra relying on the counter affidavit admitting that the petitioner faced interview in response to the advertisement, Sri Arnav Behera, learned Additional Standing Counsel submitted that the opposite party No.4 has analysed factual position seemly and is justified in refusing regularization in service. 5.1. The petitioner, joined on 01.06.2010, was entrusted to work as IFW on daily wage basis, but not contractual basis. The petitioner was not engaged by following process of open and transparent recruitment. Such engagement was made contrary to the eligibility criteria envisaged in the General Administration Department Resolution No.26108-GAD-SC-RULES- 0009-2013/Gen., dated 17.09.2013 as clarified further W.P.(C) No.38099 of 2021 Page 21 of 88 in the General Administration Department Resolution vide No.1066-GAD-SC-RULES-0009/2013/Gen., dated 16.01.2014. That apart, there was non- adherence to the requirements of the ORV Act. 5.2. It has been asserted that the statement of the petitioner that the post of IFW is solitary post is misconceived inasmuch as in the Letter No.17014— MF-III-HR-10/92, dated 06.09.1994 issued by the Directorate of Health Services, Odisha (enclosed as Annexure-C/2 to the counter affidavit) made it clear as follows: “Consequent upon division of districts and creation of new districts in the State, the IFWs working in the 10 principal districts are redeployed as per the list attached: *** Distribution of IFWs to new districts Old district *** *** 2. Puri No. of sanctioned post *** 5 *** *** *** Redeployment to new district *** 1. Nayagarh 2. Khurda 3. Puri *** No. of posts *** 2 2 1 *** 5.3. Since the post of IFW is not solitary post so far as Nayagarh district is concerned, the provisions of the ORV Act and rules framed thereunder are required to be followed. Ergo, the learned Additional Standing W.P.(C) No.38099 of 2021 Page 22 of 88 Counsel submitted that, the ruling in Dr. Chakradhar Paswan Vrs. State of Bihar, (1988) 2 SCC 214 = (1988) 3 SCR 130 may not attract in the instant case. 5.4. In connection with applicability of Dr. Chakradhar Paswan Vrs. State of Bihar, (1988) 2 SCC 214 = (1988) 3 SCR 130, the Hon‟ble Supreme Court of India in R.R. Inamdar Vrs. State of Karnataka, (2019) 14 SCR 505, made the following observations: “2. *** The learned Single Judge held that the post of Lecturer in English was a solitary post and in view of the law laid down by this Court in State of Karnataka Vrs. K. Govindappa, (2009) 1 SCC 1, the post could not have been reserved. This view of the learned Single Judge was approved in a writ appeal by the Division Bench on 17 November 2015 which gave rise to the proceedings before this Court. 3. At the outset, it would be necessary to note that the decision of the two-Judge Bench of this Court in K. Govindappa (supra), which has been followed by the learned Single Judge as well as by the Division Bench in appeal, dealt with the issue as to whether all posts of Lecturers taken together constituted a cadre for the purpose of reservation or whether a solitary post of Lecturer in History which was not interchangeable with other posts constituted a separate cadre. The High Court held that the post of a Lecturer in History could not be construed to be a cadre together with all other posts of Lecturer. This Court noted that the Constitution Bench in Post Graduate Institute of Medical Education and Research Vrs. Faculty Page 23 of 88 W.P.(C) No.38099 of 2021