Orissa High Court
Debashis Dash And Others vs State Of Odisha And Others ..... ... on 18 August, 2025
Author: Aditya Kumar Mohapatra
Bench: Aditya Kumar Mohapatra
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK
W.P.(C) No.20102 of 2025
Debashis Dash and Others ..... Petitioners
Represented By Adv. -
Mr. Rajib Rath
-versus-
State of Odisha and others ..... Opposite Parties
Represented By Adv. -
Ms. B.K. Sahu for O.P.
No.1 to 3.
Mr. Arnav Behera,
Advocate for the O.P.
No.4-OPSC
W.P.(C) No.20297 of 2025
Nadeem Sawan ..... Petitioner
Represented By Adv. -
Mr. Madan Mohan Das
-versus-
State of Odisha and Another ..... Opposite Parties
Represented By Adv. -
Ms. B.K. Sahu for O.P.
No.1.
Mr. Arnav Behera,
Advocate for the O.P.
No.2-OPSC
Page 1 of 18.
W.P.(C) No.20355 of 2025
Leeman Acharya ..... Petitioner
Represented By Adv. -
Ms. Chinmayi Tripathy
-versus-
State of Odisha and Others ..... Opposite Parties
Represented By Adv. -
Mr. C.M. Singh for O.P.
No.1 to 3.
Mr. Arnav Behera,
Advocate for the O.P.
No.4-OPSC
CORAM:
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ADITYA KUMAR MOHAPATRA
Date of hearing -24.07.2025 :: Date of judgment - 18.08.2025
I.A. No.12013 of 2025 & I.A. No.12014 of 2025
in W.P.(C) No.20102 of 2025
I.A. No.12011 of 2025 in W.P.(C) No.20297 of 2025
I.A. No.12248 of 2025 in W.P.(C) No.20355 of 2025
Aditya Kumar Mohapatra, J.
1. In I.A. No.12013 of 2025, arising out of W.P.(C) No.20102
of 2025, the Petitioners have prayed for a direction to the Opposite
Parties to do a retest by measuring their blood pressure afresh and
permit them to compete in the next physical endurance (walking
test) as well as a subsequent viva voce test which has not yet
commenced taking into consideration the fact that they have
already qualified in the written test. Similarly, I.A. No.12014 of
12014 of 2025, arising out of W.P.(C) No.20102 of 2025, has been
filed by the Petitioner with a prayer for a direction to the Opposite
Parties to keep 9 posts of Forest Ranger and Assistant Conservator
of Forests reserved for the Petitioners taking into consideration the
fact that the Petitioners have already qualified in the combined
written test of Forest Ranger and Assistant Conservator of Forests
till finalization of the writ petition.
2. I.A. No.12011 of 2025, arising out of W.P.(C) No.20297 of
2025, has been filed by the Petitioner with a prayer for a direction
to the Opposite Parties to keep one post vacant in respect of the
Petitioner till disposal of the writ petition.
3. I.A. No.12248 of 2025, arising out of W.P.(C) No.20355 of
2025, has been filed by the Petitioner with a prayer for a direction
to the Opposite Parties to keep 9 posts of Forest Ranger and
Assistant Conservator of Forests reserved, taking into consideration
the fact that Petitioner has already qualified in the combined
written test of Forest Ranger and Assistant Conservator of Forests,
till disposal of the present above noted writ petition.
4. Since the above noted interlocutory applications arise out of a
common factual background and a common recruitment test and
the prayer made in the above noted interlocutory applications are
almost identical in nature, all the above noted interlocutory
applications are being taken up for disposal by virtue of the
following common order.
5. For better understanding of the factual background involved
in the above noted applications, the facts involved in W.P.(C)
No.20102 of 2025 is being taken up for discussion while disposing
of the above noted interlocutory applications.
6. W.P.(C) No.20102 of 2025 has been filed by the 9 Petitioners
jointly with a prayer for a direction to the Opposite Party No.1 and
2 to allow the Petitioners to participate in the next phase of
recruitment test, i.e. Physical Endurance Test of Walking, and to
permit them to participate in the viva voce test as the Petitioners
have come out successful in the written test conducted by the
Opposite Party No.3 and 4. The Petitioners have also prayed for
issuance of writ of mandamus for declaring that the procedure of
disqualifying the Petitioners solely on the basis of the
advertisement under Annexure-2 and the disqualification of the
Petitioners on the basis of faulty B.P. Test (instrumental error of
digital B.P. Meter) also violates Rule-8 of the Recruitment Rules,
2013 and the same is also violative of the principles contained in
Article 14, 16 and 21 of the Constitution of India. The Petitioners
have also prayed for quashing of their disqualification on the
ground that the Petitioners were not provided with any opportunity
before disqualifying them to participate in the further recruitment
process. Moreover, such disqualification on the basis of blood
pressure test amounts to change in the recruitment process by
introducing a new clause of elimination which is dehors the
conditions in the advertisement and the provisions of the Rules,
2013.
7. The genesis of the dispute involved in the above noted writ
applications is based on a common set of facts. In May, 2023, the
Odisha Public Service Commission (in short 'OPSC') published an
advertisement online for recruitment to 45 posts of Assistant
Conservator of Forests (Group A - JB) and 131 posts of Forest
Ranger (Group-B) under Odisha Forest Service Cadre. Pursuant to
the aforesaid advertisement, the Petitioners along with other
eligible candidates submitted their application and after due
scrutiny of their applications they were allowed to participate in the
recruitment process. In between 18.08.2024 to 28.08.2024 the
written examination was conducted by the OPSC at two centres.
The Petitioners along with other candidates participated in such a
written examination.
8. While this was the position, on 03.07.2025, a notice was
published by the OPSC announcing the schedule for the Physical
Standard and Endurance Test (Walking) to be conducted from
14.07.2025 to 20.07.2025. The Petitioners were scheduled to
appear in such test on 15th and 16th July, 2025. On 09.07.2025, the
Petitioners downloaded physical test call letters from the OPSC
website.
9. Pursuant to the aforesaid call letters to participate in the
physical test, the Petitioners appeared for physical standard test. It
has been pleaded that although the Petitioners fulfilled the physical
standard prescribed for being selected, however, they were
disqualified from participating in the Physical Standard and
Endurance Test (Walking). It has also been alleged in the writ
petitions that such disqualification is based on a faulty blood
pressure measurement done by using digital instruments is in
violation of the advertisement and Rule-8 of the Recruitment Rules.
On 16.07.2025, although the Petitioners submitted a representation
via email to the Opposite Party No.4 requesting re-measurement of
blood pressure using a proper instrument and seeking permission to
appear in the walking test, however, no reply whatsoever was given
on such representation. As a result of which, the Petitioner could
not participate in the Physical Endurance Test and, as such, they
were debarred from further participating in the recruitment test.
Being aggrieved by such conduct of the Opposite Parties in
disqualifying the Petitioners only on the basis of blood pressure
measurement with the help of faulty instrument, which is contrary
to the terms and conditions contained in the advertisement as well
as the Recruitment Rules, 2013, the Petitioners have approached
this Court by filing the present batch of writ petition.
10. Heard Mr. Rajib Rath, learned counsel for the Petitioners in
W.P.(C) No.20102 of 2025; Mr. Madan Mohan Das, learned
counsel for the Petitioner in W.P.(C) No.20297 of 2025; Ms.
Chinmayi Tripathy, learned counsel for the Petitioner in W.P.(C)
No.20355 of 2025; learned counsel for the State advanced his
argument on the prayer made in the interlocutory applications on
behalf of the State-Opposite Parties, and heard Mr. Arnav Behera,
learned counsel for the OPSC. Perused the writ petitions as well as
the documents annexed thereto.
11. The above noted interlocutory applications have been filed
with a common prayer to either allow the Petitioners to participate
in the further recruitment process or, in the alternative, keep an
equal number of posts reserved for the Petitioners in each of the
above noted three writ petitions.
12. Mr. Rajib Rath, learned counsel for the Petitioners in W.P.(C)
NO.20102 of 2025, while leading the argument on behalf of the
Petitioners contended before this Court that the Petitioners, who
were eligible to participate in the recruitment process pursuant to
the advertisement, cleared the written test successfully. Thereafter,
they were eligible to participate in the physical endurance test.
Pursuant to the call letter issued to the Petitioners to participate in
the physical endurance test, the Petitioners appeared on the
scheduled date and time to participate in such test. However,
before they could participate in the physical endurance test
(walking test), the Opposite Parties in a surprise move called the
Petitioners for their blood pressure measurement with the help of
digital B.P. instrument. In good faith the Petitioners cooperated
with the Opposite Parties for measurement of their blood pressure.
Petitioners were surprised by the result of the B.P. measurement
test. Mr. Rath, at this juncture, contended that the digital B.P.
instrument used by the Opposite Parties was a faulty instrument
and the same did not reflect the correct reading. As a result of
which, the Petitioners were disqualified on the basis of such faulty
reading done by the B.P. instrument.
13. In the aforesaid context, Mr. Rath referred to Clause-5 of the
advertisement at Annexure-2 to the writ petition. While referring
to Clause-5 of the advertisement, learned counsel for the Petitioner
demonstrated that nowhere in the said clause it has been mentioned
to measure the blood pressure of the candidates. This Court on a
careful scrutiny of Clasue-5 of the advertisement found that
although the physical standard of candidates have been clearly
mentioned in the said clause, however, nowhere in the said clause
there is any provision with regard to measurement of the B.P.
reading of the candidates. As such, learned counsel for the
Petitioners argued that the B.P. measurement test which was done
by the Opposite Parties, on the basis of which the Petitioners were
disqualified, is something which is extraneous to the terms and
conditions mentioned in the advertisement. Therefore, the conduct
of the Opposite Parties in disqualifying the Petitioners from
participating further in the physical endurance test is highly illegal
and arbitrary.
14. To establish his contention that the Petitioners have been
disqualified on the basis of a test which has not been mentioned in
the advertisement and that the same does not have any basis, Mr.
Rath also referred to the Odisha Forest Service, Group-A (Junior
Branch) Recruitment and Conditions of Service) Rules, 2013 (in
short "the Rules 2013"). He further submitted that Rule-8 of the
Rules, 2013 is the only rule that governs the field relating to the
physical standard of the candidates. For better appreciation, the
aforesaid Rule-8 of the Rules, 2013 has been quoted herein below:-
"8. Physical Standard :
Candidates, who qualify in the written test shall
confirm to the following physical standard and test for
being selected by the Commission, namely:-
(i) A male candidate shall not be less than 163
cm. in height and shall have chest
measurement of at least 84 cm. expandable to
at least 89 cm.
(ii) A female candidate shall not be less than 150
cm. in height and shall have chest
measurement of at least 79 cm. expandable to
at least 84 cm.
(iii) The candidates must pass the following
physical endurance test of walking :-
(a) Male : 25 Kms. in four hours
(b) Female : 16 Kms. in four hours
Notes-(a) For the purpose of this test, necessary
arrangement shall be made by the
Commission. An officer of the Forest
Department deputed by the PCCF shall
assist the Commission in conducting
the test. The Commission shall
determine the number of successful
candidates required to undergo
physical test depending upon the
number of vacancies.
(b) Failure of candidates to fulfill any of
the provisions of this rule shall
disqualify him for the purpose of
appointment under these rules.
(c) The Government shall not be
responsible for any injury during the
test."
15. On a perusal of the Rule-8 of the Rules, 2013, this Court
observed that such a rule has been incorporated to regulate the
physical standard of the candidates. It provides that the candidates
who have qualified the written test shall confirm to the physical
standard mentioned therein and the test to be conducted by the
Commission. The Commission obviously means the Odisha Public
Service Commission as defined in Rule-2(1)(a) of the Rules, 2013.
Moreover, the condition with regard to blood pressure
measurement test could be found nowhere in the said rule. On an
overall assessment of the recruitment process, it appears that the
candidates shall be first asked to appear in the written test. On
becoming successful in written test, they will have to conform to
the physical standard and to participate in the physical endurance
test. Upon coming out successful in the physical endurance test,
the candidates shall be asked to participate in the viva voce test.
Thus, there is no requirement of measuring the blood pressure
reading of the candidates. In view of the aforesaid position, Mr
Rath as well as other learned counsels appearing for the Petitioners
contended before this Court that the conduct of the Opposite Parties
in declaring the Petitioners as disqualified on the basis of the blood
pressure reading is highly illegal and arbitrary.
16. Per contra, Mr. Arnav Behera, learned counsel appearing on
behalf of the OPSC, at the outset, contended that as per the Rules,
2013, the recruitment process is to be conducted by the OPSC.
Accordingly, upon getting the intimation with regard to the
vacancy position and on the request of the requisitioning
department, an advertisement was published by the OPSC inviting
applications from the aspiring candidates. Accordingly, a written
test was conducted in accordance with the Rules, 2013 as well as
the terms and conditions reflected in the advertisement at
Annexure-2. Mr. Behera further contended that the physical
endurance test was being carried out by the State-Opposite Parties
under the supervision of the OPSC.
17. Mr. Behera, learned counsel appearing for the OPSC further
stated that during first phase of physical endurance test, it was
found that a candidate fainted and collapsed while participating in
the walking test. Therefore, keeping in view the safety of the
candidates the State-Opposite Parties measured the blood pressure
reading of the candidates before the selected candidates could
participate in the physical endurance test. It is only those
candidates whose B.P. reading was normal were allowed to
participate in the physical endurance test. In such view of the
matter, learned counsel for the OPSC contended that the Opposite
Parties have not committed any illegality in measuring the blood
pressure of the candidates before they could participate in the
physical endurance test. Moreover, such test being in larger public
interest and in the interest of the candidates, cannot be termed as
illegal and arbitrary. Thus, it was contended that the submission
made by the learned counsels for the Petitioners is absolutely
baseless and vague.
18. Learned counsel for the State, in reply, supported the
argument advanced by the learned counsel for the OPSC. He also
submitted that although the physical endurance test was conducted
by the Forest Department under the supervision of the OPSC,
however, the same was being monitored by the experts. Keeping in
view the untoward incident that had happened during the test, the
action of the Opposite Parties cannot be faltered solely on the
ground that the blood pressure measurement has not been
mentioned in the advertisement as well as the in the Rules 2013.
In such view of the matter, learned counsel for the Petitioner
contended that the Opposite Parties have not committed any
illegality. As such, prayers made in the I.A. applications are liable
to be rejected in limine.
19. Having heard the learned counsels appearing for the
respective parties and on a careful analysis of the factual
background involved in the above noted writ petitions, this Court
observed that the Petitioners have called in question the action of
the Opposite Parties in disqualifying the Petitioners only on the
basis of blood pressure reading of the candidates. Therefore, this
Court is required to adjudicate as to whether the conduct of the
Opposite Parties in disqualifying the Petitioners only on the basis
of the blood pressure reading is valid in law or the same is an
illegal and arbitrary conduct of the Opposite Parties while
conducting the recruitment test? To answer the aforesaid question,
this Court is required to examine the legal provision as to whether
there was any such requirement to conduct a blood pressure
monitoring test of the aspiring candidates who were found eligible
in the written test conducted by the OPSC?
20. As has been referred in the preceding paragraph, this Court,
on a careful scrutiny of the advertisement, found that Clause-5 of
such advertisement at Annexure-2 lays down the procedure for
physical endurance test. Such conditions have been extracted and
inserted in the advertisement from Rule-8 of the Rules, 2013. As
has been discussed, on a close scrutiny of the Clause-5 of the
advertisement as well as Rule-8 of the Rules, 2013, this Court
found that there is no such requirement to monitor the blood
pressure of the candidates and to disqualify them from the
recruitment test solely on the basis of such blood pressure
measurement.
21. Rule-8(iii) of the Rules, 2013 provides that the candidates
must pass the physical endurance test of walking which has been
prescribed as 25 Kms. in four hours for male candidates and 16
Kms. in four hours for female candidates. The note appended to
Rule-8 of the Rules, 2013 also provides that such physical
endurance test shall be conducted by the OPSC with the help of the
PCCF by deputing an officer of Forest Department to assist the
Commission in conducting such physical test. Thus, it appears that
unless the candidates confirm to the physical standard mentioned in
sub-clause (i) and (ii) and if they do not pass the test under sub-
clause(iii) of Rule-8 of the Rules, 2013, the candidates shall
automatically be declared disqualified.
22. Rule-11 of the 2013 Rules provides the disqualification and
penalty clause. On a careful reading of Rule-11, it can be seen that
the same does not provide any provision for disqualification on the
ground of blood pressure measurement.
23. On a careful analysis of the factual matrix involved in the
above noted batch of writ petitions, further on a close scrutiny of
the provisions contained in the Rules, 2013 as well as the terms and
conditions indicated in the advertisement at Annexure-2, this Court
is of the considered view that there is no such provision to
disqualify a candidate only on the basis of the measurement of
blood pressure of such candidates. Therefore, this Court has no
hesitation in coming to a conclusion that the Opposite Parties have
committed a gross error of law by not adhering to the terms and
conditions of the advertisement as well as the Rules, 2013 and, as
such, their conduct can very well be declared as illegal and
arbitrary.
24. In the ultimate analysis of the factual as well as legal
position, this Court is of the view that the Opposite Parties have not
followed the rules while disqualifying the Petitioners. As such, the
decision to disqualify the Petitioners from the recruitment test and
preventing them from participating further in the physical
endurance test (walking test) is absolutely illegal and, as such, the
same is hereby quashed. While allowing the prayer of the
Petitioners, this Court directs the Opposite Parties to allow the
Petitioners to participate in the physical endurance test subject to
the Petitioners furnishing an undertaking supported by a certificate
from a registered medical practitioner/physician that their blood
pressure is normal. Such physical endurance test be conducted by
the Opposite Parties within a period of four weeks from the date of
communication of this order.
25. It is needless to mention here that in the event the Petitioners
are found suitable in the physical endurance test, they shall be
allowed to participate in the further recruitment process and the
final result of the recruitment shall depend upon the performance of
the Petitioners in such test.
26. In view of the aforesaid observation and direction, the
Interlocutory Applications stand disposed of. Since nothing
survives to be adjudicated in the pending writ petitions, the writ
petitions are also disposed of in view of this judgment.
(Aditya Kumar Mohapatra)
Judge
Orissa High Court, Cuttack
The 18th August, 2025/Debasis Aech, Secretary
