Orissa High Court
Asmit Kumar Sahoo And vs State Of Odisha And on 27 January, 2025
Author: Biraja Prasanna Satapathy
Bench: Biraja Prasanna Satapathy
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK
W.P.(C) Nos.26247, 13255, 13452, 13652, 13661,
13683, 14124, 14561, 14578, 14580, 14585, 14600,
14663, 14665, 14677, 15079, 15080, 15082, 15084,
15085 & 15086 of 2024
W.P.(C) No.26247 of 2024
Asmit Kumar Sahoo and
Others .... Petitioners
Mr. K.K. Swain, Advocate
-versus-
State of Odisha and
Another .... Opposite Parties
Mr. P.K. Mohanty, Sr. Advocate
with Ms. K.T. Muduli, Advocate
CORAM:
JUSTICE BIRAJA PRASANNA SATAPATHY
ORDER
Order No. 27.01.2025
06. 1. This matter is taken up through Hybrid Arrangement
(Virtual/Physical) Mode.
2. Heard learned counsel appearing for the parties.
3. Since the present batch of Writ Petitions have been
filed challenging the impugned corrigendum issued by the
Odisha Public Service Commission (for short
"Commission) on 15.05.2024 under Annexure-4, all the
Writ Petitions were heard analogously and disposed of by
the present common order.
4. It is contended that pursuant to original
advertisement issued by the Commission under
// 2 //
Annexure-1 vide Advertisement No.27 of 2023-24, the
prescribed qualification for the post of Assistant
Professor-Stage-I, was Master's Degree with at least 55%
mark or equivalent in that subject/allied subject.
4.1. It is contended that in the said advertisement, the
allied subjects in respect of the discipline "Education"
was prescribed as follows:-
"1. M.A. in Adult Education.
2. M.A. in Distance Education.
3. B.Ed. & M.Sc. in Physical Science (Physics, Chemistry,
Math, Botany).
4. B.Ed. and MA in School Subjects (Humanities)
5. M.Ed. in Foundation Courses.
6. Pedagogical Sciences."
4.2. It is however contended that while issuing the
impugned corrigendum under Annexure-4 on
15.05.2024, since the allied subjects indicated in the
original advertisement was declared as not equivalent to
M.A. in Education, the present batch of Writ Petitions
were filed challenging the same.
4.3. It is also contended that pursuant to the interim
order passed in all these batch of Writ Petitions,
petitioners have made their applications for the post in
question in the discipline of Education. But it is fairly
contended in the bar that, examination in terms of the
advertisement has not yet taken place.
4.4. Placing reliance on the judgment passed by the
Hon'ble Apex Court in Civil Appeal No.2850 of 2020
// 3 //
under Annexure-5, it is contended that the qualification
M.Ed. has been declared as equivalent to M.A. in
Education and candidates with having qualification of
M.Ed. are eligible to participate in the selection process
for the post of Assistant Professor in the discipline
Education pursuant to Annexure-1.
4.5. It is further contended that since all the petitioners
are having M.Ed. qualification, in view of the decision
rendered by the Hon'ble Apex Court under Annexure-5,
petitioners are eligible to participate in the selection
process bereft of the corrigendum issued under
Annexure-4. It is accordingly contended that on the face
of corrigendum issued under Annexure-4, in view of the
decision of the Hon'ble Apex Court, petitioners are eligible
and entitled to participate in the selection process for the
post in question.
5. Mr. P.K. Mohanty, learned Senior Counsel appearing
for the Commission on the other hand contended that
such a corrigendum was issued basing on the requisition
made by the Govt. in the department of Higher
Education.
5.1. However, learned Senior Counsel does not dispute
the case law governing the field with passing of the order
under Annexure-5 by the Hon'ble Apex Court.
// 4 //
6. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and
considering the submissions made and in view of the
judgment of the Hon'ble Apex Court under Annexure-5,
this Court finds that qualification M.Ed. has been
declared as equivalent to M.A. in Education. Since the
petitioners in the present batch of cases have got M.Ed.
qualification, placing reliance on the decision of the
Hon'ble Apex Court, this Court is of the view that the
petitioners are eligible and entitled to participate in the
selection process pursuant to Annexure-1. Therefore,
without interfering with the corrigendum issued under
Annexure-4, this Court held the petitioners eligible and
entitled to participate in the selection process pursuant to
Annexure-1. While holding so, this Court dispose of the
Writ Petitions with a direction on the Commission to allow
the petitioners to participate in the selection process as
eligible candidates in all respect.
7. All the Writ Petition accordingly disposed of.
(Biraja Prasanna Satapathy)
Judge
Basudev
Location: High Court of Orissa, Cuttack
