Orissa High Court
Bijaya Kumar Sandha & Ors vs State Of Odisha & Ors. .... Opposite ... on 12 November, 2024
Author: S.K. Panigrahi
Bench: S.K. Panigrahi
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK
W.P.(C) No.406 of 2024
Along with
W.P.(C) Nos.512 of 2024, 520 of 2024, 1378 of 2024, 1552 of 2024,
1946 of 2024, 2002 of 2024 and 17607 of 2024
Bijaya Kumar Sandha & Ors. .... Petitioner (s)
(In W.P.(C) No.406 of 2024)
Ganeswar Sahoo & Ors.
(In W.P.(C) No.512 of 2024)
Surendra Nath Goudo & Ors.
(In W.P.(C) No.520 of 2024)
Anil Kumar Pradhan
(In W.P.(C) No.1378 of 2024)
Pradeep Kumar Lenka
(In W.P.(C) No.1552 of 2024)
Bikash Kumar Baral
(In W.P.(C) No.1946 of 2024)
Dibyaranjan Mallick & Ors.
(In W.P.(C) No.2002 of 2024)
Jubaraj Mohanty
(In W.P.(C) No.17607 of 2024)
Represented By
Mr. Budhadev Routray, Sr. Adv.
Along with
Mr. J. Biswal, Adv.
Mr. Rajiv Rath, Adv.
Mr. Biplab P.B. Bahali, Adv.
Mr. Nihal Rath, Adv.
Page 1 of 10
Signature Not Verified
Digitally Signed
Signed by: BHABAGRAHI JHANKAR
Reason: Authentication
Location: ORISSA HIGH COURT, CUTTACK
Date: 13-Nov-2024 17:33:51
Mr. Anurag Pati, Adv.
Mr. Pradeep Kumar Mohapatra, Adv.
-versus-
State of Odisha & Ors. .... Opposite Party(s)
Represented By
Mr. Pitambar Acharya, Sr. Advocate
Advocate General
Along with
Mr. Saswat Das, AGA
Mr. Subir Palit, Sr. Adv.
Along with
Mr. A. Kejriwal, Adv.
(for Interveners)
Ms. Pami Rath, Sr. Adv.
Along with
M/s. Sucheta Gumansingh, Adv.
(for Interveners)
CORAM:
DR. JUSTICE S.K. PANIGRAHI
Order ORDER
No. 12.11.2024
12.
1.
These matters are taken up through hybrid arrangement.
2. The above cases are interlinked in terms of the subject matter and
prayer. However, the W.P.(C) No.9208 of 2024 is not interlinked to these
cases as the subject matter is different, hence, the same is detagged
from the aforesaid W.P.(C) No.406 of 2024 and batch of cases.
Location: ORISSA HIGH COURT, CUTTACK
3. Since common question of facts and law are involved in all the above-
mentioned Writ Petitions, the same are heard together and are being
disposed of by this common order.
4. In these batch of Writ Petitions, the petitioners who claimed to have
been succeeded in the recruitment process carried out by the Opp.
Parties pursuant to the Advertisement No.8425 dated 29.08.2023 to fill
up 941 numbers of vacant post of Fireman and Fireman Drivers.
Category wise vacancy position along with reservation thereof may be
extracted herein below:
Vacancy Position
Post UR ST SC Total
Driver
5. The petitioners challenge the action of the Opp. Parties in not filling up
the vacancies which was earmarked to be 10 % quota reserved for Home
Guards Category in accordance with the Rules1. The main thrust of
argument of the petitioners are that the Opp. Parties instead of selecting
/ recommending the candidates for the post of Fireman and Fireman
Driver as against the said 10% earmarked quota (i.e. 83), they have
selected only 29 number of candidates. The candidates who have
Proviso appended to sub-clause(a) of Rule-4 of the Odisha Fire Service (Method of
Recruitment and condition of Service of the Group-C Officers) Rules, 2021
Location: ORISSA HIGH COURT, CUTTACK
merited selection at every stage of the selection process were deprived of
getting appointment as against such earmarked quota. It is further
contended in the batch of above Writ Petitions that, the earmarked quota
meant for the Home Guards have been encroached upon by the
candidates who are admittedly less meritorious than the petitioners. The
petitioners have further prayed that they may be considered for
selection and appointment under the said 10% quota out of the total
number of advertised vacancy particularly under UR category.
6. It is borne out from the record that this Court passed some interim order
vide order dated 31.01.2024 and 02.02.2024 whereby the recruitment
process has been stalled and the appointment orders issued in favour of
the selected candidates could not be given effect.
7. From the record, it appears that the Opp. Party Nos. 1 to 5 have filed a
Counter Affidavit in W.P.(C) No. 406 of 2024 which has been adopted in
other set of Writ Petitions. In Para- 5 of the said Counter Affidavit, a
specific stand has been taken by the Opp. Parties that these vacancies
were notified for completing the process of selection by adhering to the
principle of reservations as applicable in the Govt. jobs. However, there
was complete absence of reserved vacancies for the SEBC category
which was made explicit in the Advertisement itself. They were allowed
to compete against unreserved vacancies and they fail to secure the
minimum qualifying marks fixed for the purpose of selection in the said
unreserved category.
Location: ORISSA HIGH COURT, CUTTACK
Further, in the Counter Affidavit, it was the specific stand of the
Opp. Parties that the process of selection for recruitment for the posts of
Fireman and Fireman Driver conducted pursuant to the Advertisement
dated 29.08.2023 by adhering to the Odisha Fire Service (Method of
Recruitment and condition of Service of the Group-C Officers) Rules,
2021.Insofar as the filling up 10% vacancies reserved for Home Guards is
concerned, it has been stated that the same has been done in compliance
with the principles laid down by the Apex Court in Sourav Yadav and
others vs. State of Uttar Pradesh & Ors.2 and the instruction issued vide
Letter No. 1955/Gen., dtd.19.01.2021 by the Opposite Parties are in tune
with the ratio decided in the said case regarding vertical and horizontal
reservation in filling of various civil service and posts.
8. It is further stated in para-7 of the Counter Affidavit that, as there was
no vacancies earmarked for the SEBC category in the said
advertisement, the application of the petitioners were taken into
consideration under UR category and they failed to qualify on merit.
The Recruitment Board has taken a view that Home Guards can get the
benefit of reservation within their category or else be treated as open
candidates (non-Home Guard). Since there were no vacancies in the
SEBC category, the candidates were not extended the benefits of SEBC
category. Once they were treated as open or non-Home Guard
candidates, they were in competition with other open candidates and
lost out on merit. The petitioners are misinterpreting the reservation rule
Location: ORISSA HIGH COURT, CUTTACK
claiming that 10% of reservation for Home Guards is irrespective of the
caste category.
9. Though it has been the specific stand in the Counter Affidavit filed by
the state that in order to justify their action in filling up of the post of
Fireman and Fireman Driver particularly with respect to 10% quota
earmarked for the Home Guard category, later during the course of
hearing of the present Writ Petition, filed an Additional Affidavit vide
dated 19.09.2024 sworn in by the Chief Fire Officer (SAG), Fire
Prevention Wing, Directorate of Fire & Emergency Services, Cuttack,
Odisha wherein specifically in Para-5 & 7, the following stand has been
taken: -
"5. That/ while drawing the select list, Home Guards from
the SEBC category had not been considered against
unreserved vacancy as there were no posts notified under
the SEBC category. Even if there were no vacancies in the
SEBC category as per advertisement, all candidates should
have been considered first under unreserved category
unless they have been given exemptions other than age and
fees. The Home Guards of the SEBC category were entitled
to be considered in the unreserved category as they had
been given no exemption other than age. So, as advised by
Counsel, the list has been redrawn. All candidates in
horizontal categories of Home Guards, Ex-Servicemen and
Sports, who have not availed exemption other than age,
were first considered against unreserved category. Those
who could not qualify in the unreserved category as per
marks secured by them were then considered in the two
caste categories in which vacancies had been advertised, i.e.
SC & ST. Therefore, matter relating to reservation of
Home Guards stands appropriately addressed per select list
redrawn.
Location: ORISSA HIGH COURT, CUTTACK
Xx xx xx
7. The select lists are submitted in sealed cover for
information of the Hon'ble Court.
i. Select List-1-List published on 04.01.2024.
ii. Select List-2-It is the redrawn select list including
Home Guards, Ex-Servicemen and Sports (horizontal
reservation), from the SEBC community in the
unreserved category and making consequent changes to
the select list. However, in this select list over-age
candidates have been excluded. Therefore, their Writ
Petitions have to be decided before this list can be given
effect."
10. So far as the claim of the over-aged candidates are concerned, in Para-6
of the Additional Affidavit, the following stand has been taken by the
state which is extracted hereunder:
"6. It is humbly prayed/ however/ to dismiss the Writ
Petitions filed by the over-age candidates in light of
judgment of a Division Bench of this Court relating to
appointment of Sub-Inspector of Police in W.P.(C) No.
5516 of 2023 (Maguni Sahoo & others vs. State of Odisha
and others). The ratio in the Maguni Sahoo case should be
followed in rejecting the case of over-age candidates."
11. Drawing reference to the Additional Affidavit, it was argued by the
Learned Advocate General, Odisha that the discrepancies / irregularities
pointed out by the petitioners in the present batch of Writ Petitions
particularly with respect to filling up of the post under 10% quota
earmarked for Home Guard category has been redressed and a fresh
select list has been redrawn. He produced the fresh/redrawn said select
list before this Court in a Sealed Cover. The Ld. Advocate General,
Location: ORISSA HIGH COURT, CUTTACK
further drawn the attention of this Court to Rule-4, 5 & 6 of the Odisha
Fire Service (Method of Recruitment and condition of Service of the
Group-C Officers) Rules, 2021 and submitted that the redrawn Select
List has been prepared by strictly adhering to the statutory rules. He
further contended that most of the petitioners in the above noted Writ
Petitions had been placed in the redrawn list barring a few who were
either over-aged or physically unfit. He also submitted that the Opposite
Party has filed up the 10% quota earmarked for Home Guard category in
letter and spirit hence the grievance of most of the petitioners stands
redressed.
12. At this juncture, Mr. Rajib Rath, learned counsel appearing for some of
the Petitioners strenuously submits that some cases of over-aged
candidates are pending before a co-ordinate Bench of this Court in
W.P.(C) No.29964 of 2023 and one matter before this Court vide W.P.(C)
No.9208 of 2024. He further contends that some of the candidates might
have qualified in the subsequent redrawn list which has been submitted
before this Court in a sealed cover and opened in Court.
13. He also contends that if the Writ Petitioners, in the said matter
challenging the overage have qualified in the redrawn list, the authority
should consider their cases by keeping some posts vacant.
14. Mr. Subir Palit, learned Senior Advocate appearing on behalf of some of
the successful candidates/interveners submits that many of the
interveners/applicants have successfully qualified by going through
rigor of selection test, but they might be out of the redrawn list. Hence,
Location: ORISSA HIGH COURT, CUTTACK
their grievances should also be factored in, by considering their cases in
respect of the vacancies, if any, arise in future.
15. Having heard the Learned Counsel for the parties at length and after
going through the materials available on record, as well as the redrawn
select list, which has been produced before this Court in sealed cover
today, this Court is of the view that the grievances of the petitioners
particularly with respect to filling up of the post as against the 10%
earmarked quota for Home Guard category has been redressed. No
fruitful purpose will be served by keeping the matter pending and
allowing the vacancies to remain unfilled for years together. Fire Service
being an essential service entrusted with the task of assessing the full
range of foreseeable fire, save people from fire and related risks, make
provision for prevention and protection activities and respond to fire
incidents appropriately. There is always an urgent need to facilitate
joining of Fire and Emergency Service personnel for training and
subsequent deployment. Any delay in such recruitment process will be
detrimental to the public interest and the general public will be at the
receiving end. In view of the redrawn Select List, these Writ Petitions
need to be disposed of.
16. Insofar as the claim of the over-aged candidates are concerned, it is
stated at bar that separate set of Writ Petitions are pending before a
coordinate Bench of this Court for adjudication. Therefore, this Court
without expressing any opinion on the merits with respect to the claim
of the over-aged candidates for their selection and appointment to the
Location: ORISSA HIGH COURT, CUTTACK
post of Fireman and Fireman Driver, disposes of the present batch of
Writ Petitions with a direction to the Opp. Parties to conclude the
selection process pursuant to the revised / recast / redrawn Select List
which was produced before this Court in sealed cover today and fill up
the posts accordingly.
17. With the aforesaid observations, the above-mentioned batch of Writ
Petitions are disposed of.
18. Interim order, if any, passed earlier, in any of the Writ Petitions, by this
Court stands vacated.
( Dr. S.K. Panigrahi )
Judge
B. Jhankar
Location: ORISSA HIGH COURT, CUTTACK
