Orissa High Court
Dr. Manoj Kumar Dehury & vs State Of Odisha & Ors. .... Opposite ... on 9 January, 2024
Author: Biraja Prasanna Satapathy
Bench: Biraja Prasanna Satapathy
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK
W.P.(C) No.14929 of 2020
Dr. Manoj Kumar Dehury & .... Petitioners
Anr. Mr. J.K. Khuntia, Advocate
-versus-
State of Odisha & Ors. .... Opposite Parties
Mr. S.K. Samal, AGA
CORAM:
JUSTICE BIRAJA PRASANNA SATAPATHY
ORDER
09.01.2024
Order No
01. 1. This matter is taken up through Hybrid Arrangement
(Virtual/Physical) Mode.
2. Heard Mr. J.K. Khuntia, learned counsel for the Petitioners, Mr.
S.K. Samal, learned Addl. Govt. Advocate appearing for the Opp.
Parties.
3. The Petitioners have filed the present writ petition inter alia
challenging the order dtd.01.02.2020 so issued by the Govt.-Opp.
Party No. 1 under Annexure-10.
4. Learned counsel for the Petitioners contended that pursuant to the
advertisement issued vide Advertisement No. 12/2018-19 under
Annexure-3 and the notice issued on 27.02.2019 under Annexure-4,
both the Petitioners were recommended by the Commission as
against the vacancy meant for SC & ST (Women) vide notice
dtd.07.06.2019 under Annexure-5. It is contended that on the face
of such recommendation made by the Commission under
Annexure-5 when order of appointment was not issued by the
// 2 //
Govt.-Opp. Party No. 1, they moved the Govt. under Annexure-8 &
9 inter alia with a prayer to provide them appointment as against the
post of Asst. Professor in the discipline Anatomy. But when no
decision was taken, they approached this Court in W.P.(C) No.
26906 of 2019. This Court vide order dtd.23.12.2019 while
disposing the writ petition, directs Opp. Party No. 1 to consider the
case of the Petitioner as made in their representation under
Annexure-8 series.
4.1. It is contended that Opp. Party No. 1 taking into account the
fact that there is an interim order passed by the Tribunal in O.A.
No. 1184(C) of 2019 so filed by one Dr. Smita Patra challenging
the recommendation of one Sujita Pradhan as against UR vacancy
in the discipline Anatomy, passed the impugned order by holding
that unless and until the interim order passed in O.A. No. 1184(C)
of 2019 is vacated with disposal of the matter, the claim of the
Petitioners cannot be considered on the face of the recommendation
made by the Commission under Annexure-5.
4.2. Learned counsel for the Petitioners contended that
W.P.C.(OAC) No. 1184 of 2019 has already been disposed of by
this Court vide Judgment dtd.21.12.2023. Vide the said Judgment,
this Court while quashing the recommendation of Sujita Pradhan,
who was so recommended as against UR vacancy, directed the
Commission to consider the case of Dr. Smita Patra as against UR
vacancy and this Court has not interfered with the selection and
recommendation made in respect of vacancies meant for SC & ST
(Women) Category candidate. It is accordingly contended that since
W.P.C.(OAC) No. 1184 of 2019 has been disposed of by this Court
on 21.12.2023, necessary direction be issued to Opp. Party No. 1 to
// 3 //
act upon the recommendation made by the Commission on
07.06.2019 under Annexure-5
5. Mr. S.K. Samal, learned Addl. Govt. Advocate also does not
dispute the fact that W.P.C.(OAC) No. 1184 of 2019 has been
disposed of vide Judgment dtd.21.12.2023 and in the said Judgment
the recommendation made by the Commission as against UR
vacancy has been interfered with.
6. Having heard learned counsel appearing for the Parties and
taking into account the disposal of W.P.C.(OAC) No. 1184 of 2019,
wherein this Court has only interfered with the recommendation of
the candidate as against UR vacancy, this Court while quashing the
order under Annexure-10, directs Opp. Party No. 1 to act upon the
recommendation made by the Commission on 07.06.2019 under
Annexure-5 in favour of the present Petitioners and take appropriate
step within a period of four (4) week from the date of receipt of this
order.
7. The writ petition is disposed of accordingly.
(Biraja Prasanna Satapathy)
Judge
Sneha
Location: High Court of Orissa, Cuttack
