Dr. Bedarata Dash vs Utkal University
2021 Latest Caselaw 13005 Ori

             IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK

                          W.P. (C) No. 40181 of 2021

            Dr. Bedarata Dash                ....                               Petitioner
                                                            Mr. D.N. Rath, Advocate
                                              -Versus -
            Utkal University, BBSR and       ....                         Opp. Parties
            Ors.                                                                   .
                                                                       State Counsel


                    CORAM:
                     DR. JUSTICE B.R. SARANGI
                                     ORDER

22.12.2021

W.P.(C) No. 40181 of 2021 And I.A. No.18778 of 2021

Order No. This matter is taken up through hybrid mode.

2. Mr. D.N. Rath, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner was an applicant for the post of Chief Librarian of the Utkal University pursuant to the advertisement under Annexure-4 dated 16.10.2019 having requisite qualification, but the same has been cancelled vide advertisement dated 03.12.2021 in Annexure-5 and the candidates who had applied for the above post have been called upon to apply afresh pursuant to said advertisement under Annexure-5. He further submits that as per previous advertisement under Annexure-4, age of superannuation was 60 years, but pursuant to fresh advertisement under Annexure-

5, it has been prescribed that the age should be below 45 years as on last date of application to become eligible to make application for the post. Now, the petitioner has become over age to make application. It is further contended that such action of the University is arbitrary, unreasonable and contrary to the settled position of law, in view of the fact that so far as advertisement of other University is concerned, namely, Central University of Orissa vide Annexure-7 maximum age has been prescribed as 56 years as on date of advertisement and so far as OPSC is concerned no limit of superannuation age has been prescribed. In support of such contention, Mr. Rath relies upon judgment dated 29.09.2021 passed by the apex Court in Civil Appeal No. 4991 of 2012 (The State of Jammu and Kashmir & Ors. v. Shaheena Masarat & Anr), where it has been held that appointments to the public posts should be strictly in accordance with Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution of India. Eligibility criteria should be uniform and there cannot be scope of arbitrary selections by unfettered discretion being vested in the authorities. Construing the provision relating to upper age limit as directory would be conferring unbridled power in the executive to choose persons of their choice by relaxing the age beyond 35 years. It is contended that by applying same principles here, earlier three advertisements have been cancelled and now in order to show favour to some persons the age has been fixed to 45 years and such fixation of age is contrary to the provisions of law and violative of Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution of India.

3. In the opinion of this Court, the matter requires

consideration.

4. Issue notice to the opposite parties by speed post fixing a short returnable date, requisites for which shall be filed within three days.

5. As an interim measure, it is directed that the selection pursuant to the advertisement under Annexure-5 shall continue but its result shall abide by the final outcome of this writ petition, till 21st of January, 2022.

Issue urgent certified copy as per rules.

(Dr. B.R. Sarangi) Judge GDS