[Cites 0, Cited by 0]
Orissa High Court
Prabhat Kumar Mallia vs State Of Odisha & Ors. .... Opposite ... on 9 February, 2026
Author: Biraja Prasanna Satapathy
Bench: Biraja Prasanna Satapathy
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK
W.P.(C) No.25528 of 2021
Prabhat Kumar Mallia
.... Petitioner
Mr. B. Das, Advocate
-versus-
State of Odisha & Ors. .... Opposite Parties
Mr. C.K. Pradhan, AGA
CORAM:
JUSTICE BIRAJA PRASANNA SATAPATHY
ORDER
09.02.2026
Order No.
12. 1. This matter is taken up through Hybrid Arrangement
(Virtual/Physical) Mode.
2. Heard learned counsel appearing for the Parties.
3. The present Writ Petition has been filed inter alia
challenging order dtd.16.03.2020 so issued by Opposite
Party No.2 under Annexure-8-Series. Vide the said order,
claim of the Petitioner for his engagement as a Junior Asst.
in any of the Urban Local Bodies of the State being a
L.S.G.D certificate holder was rejected.
4. Learned counsel appearing for the Petitioner
contended that Petitioner being a L.S.G.D certificate holder
of the year 1999, in terms of the provisions contained
under the Odisha Municipal Rule, though became eligible
for his engagement as a Junior Assistant, but because of
the inaction on the part of the Opposite Parties in not
preparing any merit list of eligible candidate having L.S.G.D
certificate holder, Petitioner was deprived to get the benefit
of appointment.
// 2 //
4.1. It is further contended that Petitioner challenging
such inaction of the Opposite Parties when approached this
Court by filing W.P.(C) No.18586 of 2013 and this Court
vide order dtd.02.04.2019 permitted the Petitioner to make
a representation before the Competent Authority, the said
order was assailed by the Petitioner before this Court in
W.A. No.219 of 2019. The Writ Appeal in question was
disposed of vide order dtd.12.09.2019 vide Annexure-10
inter alia with the following direction:-
"In view of the aforesaid facts and circumstances, since
OLFS Rules categorically envisages for giving engagement to
the LSGD certificate holders and though it is considered as
preferential qualification for LSGD certificate holders for
appointment in the Urban Local Bodies, no recruitment was
made or no select list was prepared after 2001. In view of the
said fact, while modifying the order of the learned Single
Judge dated 02.04.2019 passed in W.P.(C) No.18586 of
2013, we direct the State Government to take a decision for
engagement of the LSGD certificate holders for engagement of
Junior Assistant in the Local Fund Bodies, as directed by this
Court earlier in W.P.(C) No.25634 of 2012 disposed of on
19.06.2015. The above exercise shall be completed within a
period of three months from the date of communication of the
order."
4.2. It is contended that without proper appreciation of the
order so passed by the Writ Appellate Court under
Annexure-10, claim of the Petitioner has been rejected, vide
the impugned order dtd.16.03.2020 under Annexure-8-
Series. Accordingly, it is contended that the impugned order
is not sustainable in the eye of law.
5. Mr. C.K. Pradhan, learned Addl. Government
Advocate on the other hand while supporting the impugned
order contended that though there was provision for
// 3 //
engagement of L.S.G.D. certificate holder as Junior Asst.
and such a list was prepared by including the names of 181
candidates those who were having the certificate till 1993,
but after providing appointment to some of the enlisted
candidates, the list was rescinded vide notice
dtd.30.12.2025, so available under Annexure-6.
5.1. It is contended that such a notice issued under
Annexure-6 was never assailed by anybody and no such
fresh list including the certificate holders beyond 1993 was
ever prepared.
5.2. It is also contended that even though it is not
disputed that being a L.S.G.D certificate holder, Petitioner
was eligible to get the benefit of appointment, but since
after 2001 no such list was ever published and candidates
enlisted in the year 2001 in respect of L.S.G.D certificate
holder up to the year 1993 were not provided with
appointment and the said list was rescinded vide notice
dtd.30.12.2015, petitioner's claim pursuant to the order
passed in W.A. No.219 of 2019, was rejected vide order
dtd.16.03.2020 under Annexure-8-Series.
5.3. It is contended that since the practice of providing
appointment to L.S.G.D certificate holder has been stopped
since 2015 and no such list was prepared by including the
certificate holders from the year 1994 onwards and
Petitioner being a certificate holder of the year 1999, no
illegality or irregularity can be found with the impugned
rejection.
// 4 //
6. Pursuant to the order passed by this Court on
12.01.2026, learned counsel appearing for the Petitioner
also fairly contended that notice dtd.30.12.2015 under
Annexure-6 was never assailed by any of the affected
parties.
7. Having heard learned counsel appearing for the
Parties and considering the submissions made, this Court
finds that Petitioner being a L.S.G.D certificate holder,
claiming the benefit of appointment as against the post of
Junior Asst. taking into account the benefit extended in
favour of such L.S.G.D. certificate holders up to of the year
1993 with preparation of the list in the year 2001 raised his
claim to get the benefit of appointment. As no decision was
taken on the Petitioner's claim, he approached this Court
by filing W.P.(C) No.18586 of 2013. This Court vide order
dtd.02.04.2019, when permitted the Petitioner to make an
application for its consideration, Petitioner filed Writ Appeal
No.219 of 2019.
7.1. However, as found from the record, list prepared in
the year 2001 including the eligible L.S.G.D Holders up to
the year 1993 was rescinded after extending the benefit of
appointment in favour some of the enlisted candidates, vide
notice dtd.30.12.2015 under Annexure-6. It is not disputed
by either of the parties that such a notice was ever assailed
before any forum.
7.2. It is also not disputed that after 2001, no further list
was prepared by enlisting the candidates having L.S.G.D.
// 5 //
certificate from the year 1994 onwards. Since the
beneficiaries of the list prepared in the year 2001 in respect
of candidates with L.S.G.D Holders up to the year 1993,
never challenged the notice dtd.30.12.2015 when the list
was rescinded, and no such fresh list was ever published by
enlisting the candidates having such certificates from the
year, 1994 onwards, this Court is of the view that Petitioner
cannot be extended with the benefit and his claim has been
rightly rejected vide the impugned order. This Court
accordingly is not inclined to interfere with the same and
dismiss the writ petition.
8. Accordingly, the Writ Petition stands dismissed.
(Biraja Prasanna Satapathy)
Judge
Subrat
Location: HIGH COURT OF ORISSA, CUTTACK
