JUDGMENT : DR. B.R. SARANGI, J. 1. Neelachal Ispat Nigam Limited, a joint venture company promoted by MMTC Limited (a Government of India Enterprise) and IPICOL (a Government of Odisha undertaking), registered under the Companies Act, 1956. It has set up 1.1 million ton integrated iron and steel plant at Kalinga Nagar, Duburi, Jajpur. In phase-I, it was envisaged to produce pig iron, LAM Coke along with Nut Coke, crow bar, ammonium sulphate, granulated slag. In second phase, it was envisaged to produce billets bar, wire rod of different grades and sizes. It has got its own captive power plant to meet the internal power requirement. It also exports substantial quantity of power from the said power plant. To manage the affairs, it had definite human resource policies which provides work environment that makes the employees committed and motivated for maximum productivity, system for maintaining transparency and fairness in dealing with employees, empowering employees for achieving target through commitment, responsibility and accountability etc. It has also encouraged team work, creativity and innovative and high achievement orientation, providing opportunity for developing skill and acknowledges employee’s growth. It also got human resources development policy which nurtures employee’s potential for the prosperity of the organization and to accomplish, it had identified development needs of the employees on regular basis, provides necessary training and mandatory effectiveness of the trainee, so that the quality of training also gets upgraded. It facilitates the employees for continuous development of their knowledge based skills, efficiency and self expression, behaviour, so that they contribute positively with commitment for the growth and prosperity of the organization while maintaining high level of motivation and satisfaction. The petitioner was appointed as Operative-cum-Senior Technician Trainee (Mechanical) and was confirmed in the said post in the S-6 grade. Thereafter, he got three consecutive promotions to the grades, i.e., S-7, S-8 and on 08.06.2011 he was promoted and posted as Operative-cum-Senior Technician (S-9). While continuing in service, he completed his associate membership examination in Mechanical Engineering from the Institute of Mechanical Engineer (India), which is equivalent to degree in mechanical engineering and on 14.11.2006, the petitioner obtained certificate of proficiency as Boiler Operator Engineering (BOE) from Govt. of Odisha. Opposite party no.1 formulated a policy for promotion from non-executive to executive grade, which was approved by the Board of the Company. of Odisha. Opposite party no.1 formulated a policy for promotion from non-executive to executive grade, which was approved by the Board of the Company. On the basis of the said policy, rules were framed for promotion from non-executive to executive grade. In order to give effect to the said policy, opposite party no.1-Neelachal Ispat Nigam Limited issued an advertisement in Annexure-6 in daily ‘Samaj’ dated 22.04.2013 inviting applications for various posts and also gave opportunity to the internal candidates from non-executive category with required professional qualification to be considered for Jr. Officer (E-O) level. The detail of such advertisement was directed to be seen in the website of opposite party no.1. The website of opposite party no.1-company, as it reveals from Annexure-7, made a publication captioning “Advertisement No.02/2013/NINL”. So far as Post Code-04, Joint Manager (Power Plant) of the said advertisement is concerned, it has been stated as follows:- Post code Position Qualification No.of posts Max. age (in Yrs) Experience PC-04 Jr. Manager (Power Plant) Degree in engineering in Electrical/Mechanical from recognized university/institute and also Boiler Operation Engineering competency certificate is a must 05 31 Minimum two years of experience in operation and maintenance of power plant preferably in gas based power plant. knowledge/experience of boiler operation is essential. As per the advertisement, the candidates must have Degree in Engineering in Electrical/Mechanical from recognized university/institute and also Boiler Operation Engineering, competency certificate is must. Apart from the same, minimum two years of experience in operation and maintenance of power plant, preferably in gas based power plant, knowledge/experience of boiler operation is essential. Total five posts were advertised and maximum age limit was prescribed for the said post was 31 years. Pursuant to such advertisement of opposite party no.1-company, the petitioner having requisite qualification applied for the same and on being called upon appeared at the interview. But he could not be selected, whereas opposite party nos.4 and 7, having no requisite experience, were selected and promoted to the said post. 2. Mr. B. Dasmohapatra, learned counsel for the petitioner states that if the advertisement specifically indicates that the requirements of minimum qualification and experience are to be satisfied, the intending candidates, while making applications, should have adhered to the same and the authority should also equally follow the same while conducting the selection procedure. 2. Mr. B. Dasmohapatra, learned counsel for the petitioner states that if the advertisement specifically indicates that the requirements of minimum qualification and experience are to be satisfied, the intending candidates, while making applications, should have adhered to the same and the authority should also equally follow the same while conducting the selection procedure. But opposite parties no.4 and 7, having not possessed requisite qualification and experience, have been selected and promoted to the post of Jr. Manager (Power Plant). So far as opposite party no.4 is concerned, he had got less than six months experience, whereas opposite party no.7 had got less than two years of experience. Thereby, both the opposite parties no.4 and 7, having not possessed requisite experience, could not have been qualified for selection to the post of Jr. Manager (Power Plant) as advertised in Annexure-7, excluding the petitioner, who has got requisite qualification and experience. 3. Mr. S. Ghosh, learned counsel appearing for opposite parties no.1 to 3, referring to paragraph-8 of the counter affidavit, stated that the petitioner, as well as opposite parties no.4 to 8 were applicants pursuant to the advertisement in Annexure-7 and, having requisite qualification, they were called upon and appeared at the interview and accordingly merit list was prepared on the basis of the performance in the interview. As the appointment was made to the entry level post of executive category, i.e., (E-O) level, the selection committee did not insist upon required experience for the internal candidates, who were only called upon to appear at the interview basing upon the requisite qualification advertised. More so, the experience in operation and maintenance in a gas based power plant was not an essential requirement, but the external candidates having such experience were preferred. However, merit of a candidate was the paramount consideration for selection and, as such, seniority of an internal candidate at the non-executive level was irrelevant for the purpose of selection. Thereby, the authorities have not committed any illegality or irregularity in selecting opposite party nos.4 and 7 for the post applied for. 4. Though notice was issued to opposite party nos.4 to 8 by special messenger pursuant to order dated 21.01.2004 and the same was made sufficient, none had entered appearance on their behalf. As despite valid service of notice, none had entered appearance on behalf of opposite party nos.4 to 8, this Court proceeded for hearing. 5. 4. Though notice was issued to opposite party nos.4 to 8 by special messenger pursuant to order dated 21.01.2004 and the same was made sufficient, none had entered appearance on their behalf. As despite valid service of notice, none had entered appearance on behalf of opposite party nos.4 to 8, this Court proceeded for hearing. 5. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and after perusing the records, since pleadings between the parties have been exchanged, with the consent of the learned counsel for the parties, this writ petition is being disposed of finally at the stage of admission. 6. The undisputed fact being that opposite party no.1 issued an advertisement in Annexure-6, which was published in Odia daily ‘The Samaj’ on 22.04.2013 for various posts including the post of Jr. Manager (Power Plant). Such advertisement was published in detail in the official website of opposite party no.1 vide Annexure-7, wherein it was clearly specified that minimum qualification for the said post was Degree in Engineering in Electrical/Mechanical from recognized university/institute and Boiler Operation Engineering competency certificate is must. Apart from the same, minimum two years of experience in operation and maintenance of power plant, preferably in a gas based power plant, knowledge/experience of boiler operation was essential. This being the requirement of the advertisement itself and pursuant to such condition stipulated in the advertisement, the petitioner along with opposite parties nos.4 to 8 submitted their applications. The petitioner has got requisite qualification and experience, whereas opposite parties nos.4 and 7 had no requisite experience as per the advertisement itself, but they have been selected and promoted by the authority concerned. 7. In the counter affidavit, a different stand altogether has been taken by the opposite party authorities to justify their action contrary to the advertisement issued. Meaning thereby, it has been stated that since the appointment was made to the entry level post of executive category, i.e., (E-O) level, the selection committee did not insist upon required experience for the internal candidates. That itself indicates that the selection committee had resorted to an apish method, which is contrary to the advertisement issued. More so, in the counter affidavit the opposite party authorities cannot and could not have taken a different stand than that of the condition stipulated in the advertisement itself. That itself indicates that the selection committee had resorted to an apish method, which is contrary to the advertisement issued. More so, in the counter affidavit the opposite party authorities cannot and could not have taken a different stand than that of the condition stipulated in the advertisement itself. Thereby, the authorities have acted contrary to the provisions of law and, as such, the counter affidavit cannot supplement and supplant the views taken by the selection committee contrary to the advertisement issued. In the advertisement, it has been clearly indicated that knowledge and experience in boiler operation is an essential condition, whereas in the counter affidavit it has been stated that experience in operation and maintenance in a gas based power plant is not an essential requirement, which clearly runs contrary to the advertisement issued. It is stated in the counter affidavit that the external candidates having such experience were preferred. But the advertisement does not stipulate any preferential benefit. 8. The Constitution Bench of the apex Court in Mohinder Singh Gill v. The Chief Election Commissioner, New Delhi, AIR 1978 SC 851 held as follows: “…… when a statutory functionary makes an order based on certain grounds, its validity must be judged by the reasons so mentioned and cannot be supplemented by fresh reasons in the shape of affidavit or otherwise. Otherwise, an order bad in the beginning may, by the time it comes to court on account of a challenge, get validated by additional grounds later brought out.” Orders are not like old wine becoming better as they grow old. 9. The apex Court in Gordhandas Bhanji, AIR 1952 SC 16 held as follows: “Public orders publicly made, in exercise of a statutory authority cannot be construed in the light of explanations subsequently given by the officer making the order of what he meant, or of what was in his mind, or what he intended to do. 9. The apex Court in Gordhandas Bhanji, AIR 1952 SC 16 held as follows: “Public orders publicly made, in exercise of a statutory authority cannot be construed in the light of explanations subsequently given by the officer making the order of what he meant, or of what was in his mind, or what he intended to do. Public orders made by public authorities are meant to have public effect and are intended to affect the acting and conduct of those to whom they are addressed and must be construed objectively with reference to the language used in the order itself.” In view of the judgments of the apex Court, referred to above, this Court is of the considered view that interpretation has to be made on the basis of the advertisement and subsequently the same cannot be changed or modified by way of counter affidavit. In such view of the matter, the selection and promotion of opposite parties no.4 and 7 to the post of Jr. Manager cannot sustain in the eye of law and deserves to be quashed. Accordingly, the selection and promotion of opposite parties no.4 and 7 is hereby quashed. Opposite parties no.1 to 3 are directed to give promotion to the petitioner from the date of the selection, as he had requisite qualification and experience, and grant all benefits from the date of selection in accordance with law. 10. The writ petition is allowed to the extent indicated above. No order to cost.