Krushna Chandra Panda vs State Of Odisha And Others ..... ...
2025 Latest Caselaw 596 Ori

Orissa High Court

Krushna Chandra Panda vs State Of Odisha And Others ..... ... on 14 May, 2025

Author: Aditya Kumar Mohapatra

Bench: Aditya Kumar Mohapatra

                      IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK

                                     WP(C) No.13777 of 2025

                 Krushna Chandra Panda                .....                Petitioner
                                                               Represented By Adv.
                                                               - Amit Kumar Sahu

                                               -versus-

                 State Of Odisha and others           .....        Opposite Parties
                                                                Mr. J.K. Bal, AGA


                                     CORAM:
                       THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ADITYA KUMAR
                                   MOHAPATRA

                                               ORDER

14.05.2025 Order No.

01. 1. This matter is taken up through Hybrid mode.

2. Heard learned counsel for the Petitioner as well as learned counsel for the State-Opposite Parties. Perused the writ application as well as the documents annexed thereto.

3. The Petitioner has filed the present writ application with the following prayer:

"Under the above circumstances, it is therefore humbly prayed that the Hon'ble Court be graciously pleased to set aside the Govt. Notification no. 4156/FE & ECC dtd:

18.02.2025 under Annexure-1 as it is unjustified, arbitrary and unconstitutional as it violates article 14 and 16 of the Constitution of India;

And further the Hon'ble Court be pleased to direct the Opp. Parties to consider the petitioner for promotion to the post of Forester pursuant to Rule-14 Odisha Subordinate Forest Service (Method of Recruitment and Conditions of Service of Foresters) Rules, 2018 as it has been amended in the year, 2020 and to give promotion to the petitioner as he is otherwise eligible and entitled for such promotion to the post Forester and to grant him all consequential service and financial benefits within a stipulated period as deem fit and proper,

And/or pass any other appropriate writ/writs, order/orders and direction/directions in the fitness of the case;"

4. Learned counsel for the Petitioner at the outset contended that the Petitioner, was duly selected and appointed as Forest Guard on contractual basis in the year 2007 and subsequent thereto under the Malkangiri Forest Division, Malkangiri. Thereafter, his service was regularized by virtue of order dated 29.12.2013. After regularization of his service a common gradation list was also prepared for the post of Forest Guard and the same was published under Annexure-3 to the writ petition.

5. Learned counsel for the Petitioner further contended that at the time of joining in the post of Forest Guard, the Petitioner was complying with all physical standard requirement as has been provided in the Rules. While this was the position, the Odisha Subordinate Forest Service (Method of Recruitment and Conditions of service of Foresters) Rules, 2018 was amended in the year 2021.

By virtue of such amendment, Rule-14 therein has been amended. As per such amendment, it has been provided that the Forest Guard shall be eligible for promotion to the post of Forester subject to satisfaction of the conditions laid down therein. At this juncture, he further submitted that the Petitioner complied with all the conditions required to be complied with for his promotion to the post of Forester from the post of Forest Guard. Accordingly, the case of the Petitioner was considered by the Opposite Parties.

6. The grievance of the Petitioner in the present writ petition is that the State Government in exercise of its power of relaxation under Rule-25 of the Odisha Subordinate Forest Service (Method of Recruitment and Conditions of service of Foresters) Rules, 2018 has granted relaxation with regard to the physical standard of the Forest Guards who are to be promoted to the post of Forester in terms of amended Rule-14. Further, referring to the notification granting such relaxation, dated 18.02.2025 under Annexure-1 to the writ petition, learned counsel for the Petitioner contended that certain relaxations have been granted in terms of Rule-6(6) with regard to the physical standard for promotion to the post of Forester.

7. In the aforesaid context, learned counsel for the Petitioner submitted that the present Petitioner, although meets the physical standard as has been provided under Rule-6(6), however, by virtue of the relaxation granted vide notification under Annexure-1, some candidates who are otherwise ineligible in view of the eligibility criteria of physical standard mentioned under Rule-6(6), have also become eligible. In such view of the matter, learned counsel for the Petitioner contended that such grant of relaxation is in violation of

Article 14 of the Constitution of India. Since, by virtue of the relaxations, certain candidates who were originally ineligible will become eligible. In the aforesaid context, learned counsel for the Petitioner referred to the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Ankita Thakur & Ors. v. The H.P. Staff Selection Commission & Ors. in Civil Appeal No.7602 of 2023 disposed of on 09.11.2023. By referring to the aforesaid judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court, learned counsel appearing for the Petitioner contended that the Supreme Court has categorically observed that the law is settled, i.e. if the rules provides for a power to relax the eligibility criteria, the same could be exercised only if such power is reserved in the advertisement and when this power is exercised, there must be wide publicity of its exercise to that persons who are likely to benefit by exercise of such power get the opportunity to apply and compete. Accordingly, learned counsel for the Petitioner contended that the grant of relaxation in the manner, it has been done by the State- Opposite Parties under Annexure-1 is illegal and arbitrary and the same is violative of Article 14 & 16 of Constitution of India and contrary to the principle laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court the judgment of Ankita Thakur (supra).

8. Learned counsel for the State on the other hand contended that it appears that the Petitioner has not approached the State-Opposite Parties with a prayer to reconsider the decision of grant of relaxation under Annexure-1 to the writ petition instead he has approached this Court directly by filing the present writ petition. He further contended that in the event the Petitioner is granted liberty to approach the Opposite Party No.1 to reconsider the decision in terms

of the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court as well as the grounds that are likely to be taken by the Petitioner against the grant of such relaxation with a further direction to the Opposite Party No.1 to consider such grounds as raised by the Petitioner in accordance with law and in terms of the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court within a stipulated period of time, he will have no objection to the same.

9. Considering the submissions made by the learned counsels appearing for the respective parties, on a careful analysis of the factual background of the present case and on a close scrutiny of the documents annexed to the writ petition, further taking note of the fact that the Petitioner, before approaching this Court has not approached the Opposite Parties, this Court deems it proper to dispose of the writ petition at the stage of admission by granting liberty to the Petitioner to file a detailed representation before the Opposite Party No.1 taking therein all the grounds along with all supporting documents as well as judgments in support of his contention within a period of ten days from today. In such eventuality, the Opposite Party No.1 shall consider the grievance involved in the representation of the Petitioner by taking note of the legal position as well as the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court and dispose of the representation within a period of four weeks from the date of communication of a certified copy of today's order by passing a speaking and reasoned order. The final decision so taken shall be communicated to the Petitioner within a week thereafter. It is further made clear that the Opposite Party No.1 shall make every endeavor to dispose of the representation of the Petitioner before taking any further steps with

regard to the promotion to the post of Forester pursuant to the notification dated 18.02.2025.

10. With the aforesaid observations/directions, the writ application stands disposed of.

Issue urgent certified copy of this order as per Rules.

                                                      ( Aditya Kumar Mohapatra )
                                                                 Judge
S.K. Rout





            Digitally Signed                                                  Page 6 of 6.


            Location: High Court of Orissa, Cuttack
            Date: 19-May-2025 09:45:44