Research › Search › Judgment

Orissa High Court · body

2017 DIGILAW 165 (ORI)

Prafulla Kumar Dalabehera v. State of Odisha

2017-02-14

SANJU PANDA, SUJIT NARAYAN PRASAD

body2017
JUDGMENT : S.N. Prasad, J. This writ petition has been filed for quashing the order dated 26.9.2016 passed in M.P.No. 1067(C) of 2016 arising out of O.A.No. 2481(C) of 2016. 2. The fact of the instant writ petition is that the Housing and Urban Development Department of Government of Odisha decided to fill up 17 posts of Assistant Town Planner, Class-I Junior (Group-A) of Odisha Town Planning Service under the Directorate of Town Planning, Odisha, Bhubaneswar by direct recruitment through Odisha Public Service Commission. The Principal Secretary to the Government in Housing and Urban Development Department has sent a requisition to the Odisha Public Service Commission to initiate a recruitment process and in terms thereof, the Odisha Public Service Commission has come up with an advertisement bearing No.13 of 2012-13. In the advertisement, it has been notified that the posts are to be advertised under the Orissa Town Planning Service Rules, 1970, as amended from time to time. The petitioner passed Post Graduation in Economics from Utkal University in the year 1992 and Masters in Planning with specialization in Urban and Regional Planning from the School of Planning, Center for Environmental Planning and Technology (CEPT), Ahmadabad in the year 2002 and also he has experience of more than 14 years as well as having membership in the Institute of Town Planners and thus, he having the required qualification as per the Orissa Town Planning Service Rules, 1970, made online application along with all requisite documents, certificates and required fees and thereafter, he was waiting for called upon for the interview, but no intimation has been received and when it was enquired about the development of the same, he came to know that the Odisha Public Service Commission has sent a letter on 27.6.2013 to the Principal Secretary, Housing and Urban Development Department, Bhubaneswar mentioning therein that there has been ambiguity about the required qualification and experience prescribed for the post and the Director, Town Planning, Orissa, Bhubaneswar, who was deputed by the Government to the Commission to advise the Commission on the eligibility of candidates for recruitment to the post of Assistant Town Planner and it was concluded that as per the qualification prescribed in the Rules, according to which advertisement was made by the Commission, not a single candidate possessed the eligibility criteria and further the Director, Town Planning, Odisha was advised to take steps to amend the Rules. 3. The petitioner being aggrieved with the inaction of the Odisha Public Service Commission as well as the State of Odisha, has approached the Odisha Administrative Tribunal in O.A.No. 2481(C) of 2016 for issuance of a direction upon the Odisha Public Service Commission as well as the State of Odisha to complete the selection process and publish the result of the recruitment process initiated by virtue of issuance of advertisement No.13 of 2012-13 for recruitment to the post of Assistant Town Planner under the Housing and Urban Development Department, which is not being concluded even in spite of the order passed by the Odisha Administrative Tribunal in O.A.No.1155(C) of 2014. The petitioner has also filed one Miscellaneous Petition being M.P.No. 1067(C) of 2016 for issuance of a direction upon the opposite parties not to issue any advertisement for filling up of the post of Assistant Town Planner under the Housing and Urban Development Department till disposal of the Original Application, but the same has been rejected vide order dated 26.9.2016 by the Odisha Administrative Tribunal. Being aggrieved, the petitioner is before this Court by way of this writ petition. 4. We have gone through the order passed by the learned Tribunal in M.P.No. 1067(C) of 2016 and found that the Tribunal after taking into consideration the prayer made by the applicant in the Miscellaneous Petition, which is for issuance of a direction upon the respondent-opposite parties not to issue any advertisement for filling up of the post of Assistant Town Planner under the Housing and Urban Development Department till disposal of the Original Application, but the learned Tribunal while rejecting the Miscellaneous Petition has observed that since no such advertisement has appeared so far, the prayer made by the applicant is based on conjectures. It is settled that no court of law can pass order in anticipation and for passing an order, there must be a valid cause of action. It is also settled that merely on the apprehension, no blanket interim order can be passed by the court of law. It is settled that no court of law can pass order in anticipation and for passing an order, there must be a valid cause of action. It is also settled that merely on the apprehension, no blanket interim order can be passed by the court of law. The admitted position of the case which we have got after going through the order impugned is that the date when the order has been passed by the learned Tribunal in M.P.No. 1067 (C) of 2016, no fresh advertisement has been notified by the opposite party-State or Odisha Public Service Commission and as such, the prayer made by the applicant in the Miscellaneous petition has not been found to be sustainable and accordingly, it has been rejected and date has been fixed for further hearing. 5. Accordingly, in our considered view, the learned Tribunal has not committed any error in passing the impugned order and as such, we find no reason to interfere with the same. Accordingly, the writ petition stands dismissed.