Research › Search › Judgment

Orissa High Court · body

2016 DIGILAW 879 (ORI)

Mangal Charan Murmu v. State of Orissa

2016-09-27

B.K.DASH, M.M.PRAHARAJ

body2016
ORDER B.K.DASH, Acting Chairman - The applicants have approached this Tribunal to direct respondent No.4 to allow them to participate in the physical as well as other tests for appointment of Contractual Forest Guards as per the advertisement by cancelling the select list dated 27.2.2015 issued by respondent No.4. 2. Pursuant to the advertisement vide Annexure-2 for the post of Forest Guard in Bhadrak Wild Life Division, the applicants submitted their applications. As their applications were found to be in order, they were directed to appear in the written examination and accordingly they appeared in the written test and as they qualified in the said test, they appeared for certificate verification on 27.2.2015. However, they were not allowed to appear in the subsequent test on the ground that they have not registered their names in the Employment Exchange within the concerned Forest Division. It is averred that such action of the respondents is discriminatory as well as violation of the rule governing the field. Hence, it is urged to quash the select list and the applicants be given opportunity to appear in the subsequent tests. 3. Though no counter has been filed by the State respondents, yet basing on instruction learned Standing Counsel submitted that as per the stipulation made in the advertisement, a candidate is not eligible to appear in the recruitment examination who has not registered his name in an Employment Exchange situated within the concerned Forest Division. Since the applicants have not registered their names within the Forest Division of Bhadrak, they were not eligible to apply and to be considered for the post. 4. Learned Counsel for the applicants submitted that the applicants belong to reserve category and they have registered their names in Bhubaneswar Special Employment Exchange for SC & ST and there was no necessity to register their names in any other Employment Exchange. 5. Considering the submission, we note that the applicants have qualified in the written test held on 18.1.2015 as per notice dtd. 18.2.2015 vide Annexure-4. On 19.2.2015 vide Annexure-5 notice was issued directing the qualified candidates to attend the certificate verification on 27.2.2015 and the applicants have also appeared on that date for certificate verification. On the same day, notice was issued directing one Dipti Mayee Singh and Rama Chandra Singh to appear in the subsequent test. 18.2.2015 vide Annexure-4. On 19.2.2015 vide Annexure-5 notice was issued directing the qualified candidates to attend the certificate verification on 27.2.2015 and the applicants have also appeared on that date for certificate verification. On the same day, notice was issued directing one Dipti Mayee Singh and Rama Chandra Singh to appear in the subsequent test. No document or any material has been furnished showing that the applicants have been denied the opportunity to appear in the subsequent test on the ground that they have not registered their names in the Employment Exchange within the jurisdiction of Bhadrak Wild Life Division. 6. Appointment to the post of Forest Guard is made as per the Odisha Sub-ordinate Forest Service (Method of Recruitment and Condition of Service of Forest Guards) Rules, 1998. Rule 13 provides the eligibility criteria for a candidate, but no such condition with regard to registration of name in the local Employment Exchange has been mentioned. However, in the advertisement, stipulation in Clause-11 has been made, that to be eligible to apply; a candidate should have registered in the district Employment Exchange in the concerned Forest Division. Such stipulation in the advertisement is violative of the statutory provisions. In the case of Ex-NK. P. Seth and others – Vrs.- General Manager State Bank of India reported in (2010) II ILR Cuttack 507, the Hon’ble Court in a similar case observed that, keeping the mandate laid down by the Constitution in mind, this Court feels that any person who is a resident of the State and satisfy the criteria and other eligibility conditions shall be entitled to be considered for appointment to any of the posts lying vacant in the State. Thus keeping in view the principles as laid down; the stipulation made in the advertisement is illegal and violative of the statutory provisions. The applicants cannot be denied consideration of appointment in Bhadrak Wild Life Division on the ground that they have not registered their names in the Employment Exchange within the same division. It may be noted that the case of the applicants do not fall within that criteria, as they have registered their names in the Special Employment Exchange, Bhubaneswar which is meant for SC & ST candidates. There is, therefore, no reason to deprive them from appearing in the subsequent tests, only on the said ground. 7. It may be noted that the case of the applicants do not fall within that criteria, as they have registered their names in the Special Employment Exchange, Bhubaneswar which is meant for SC & ST candidates. There is, therefore, no reason to deprive them from appearing in the subsequent tests, only on the said ground. 7. The applicants have come up with a prayer to quash the select list vide Annexure-6. In fact Annexure-6 does not appear to be a select list, but a notice (vide Annexure-6) in which one Dipti Mayee Singh and Rama Chandra Singh have been directed to appear in the subsequent tests. Admittedly, they have not been impleaded as parties. In the event, order is passed quashing the said select list vide Annexure-6, those persons will be affected and we are not inclined to quash the same without giving them reasonable opportunity of being heard. 8. Thus in view of the above discussion, the O.A. is disposed of with a direction to the respondents to allow the applicants to appear in the subsequent tests, if they are otherwise suitable and in the event they succeed in the subsequent test; appropriate action be taken for their appointment and if necessary by cancelling earlier select list but following the principle of natural justice and giving due opportunity to the selected candidates. The entire exercise be completed within a period of four months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. With these order the O.A. is disposed of. M.M. PRAHARAJ, Member (Admn.) I agree. O.A. disposed of.