[Cites 3, Cited by 0]
Orissa High Court
Gopal Krishna Behera vs State Of Odisha & Anr. .... Opposite ... on 20 January, 2026
Author: Biraja Prasanna Satapathy
Bench: Biraja Prasanna Satapathy
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK
W.P.(C) Nos. 14056, 16050, 16273, 16284, 16447,
16460, 16461, 16466, 16557, 16588, 16595, 16839,
17241, 17311, 17504, 17710, 18179, 18413, 18476,
19076, 19345, 20427, 21214, 21240, 21767, 27400,
27423, 28709 & 29178 of 2025
W.P.(C) No. 14056 of 2025
In the matter of an application under Articles 226 & 227 of the
Constitution of India.
..................
Gopal Krishna Behera .... Petitioners
-versus-
State of Odisha & Anr. .... Opposite Parties
For Petitioners : Mr. B. Routray, Sr. Advocate
along with
Mr. J. Biswal, Advocate
For Opp. Parties : Mr. M.R. Mohanty,
Addl. Govt. Advocate
Mr. S. Swain, Advocate
(Opp. Party No. 2)
PRESENT:
THE HON'BLE JUSTICE BIRAJA PRASANNA SATAPATHY
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Date of Hearing: 29.10.2025 & Date of Judgment: 20.01.2026
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
// 2 //
Biraja Prasanna Satapathy, J.
Since the issue involved in the present batch of writ
petitions is identical, all the matters were heard analogously and
disposed of by the present common order.
2. All the writ petitions have been filed inter alia challenging order
dtd.12.05.2025 so passed by the authorities of Odisha Staff Selection
Commission (in short Commission), whereby Petitioners have been
debarred to appear in any examination conducted by the Commission
for a period of 6 years starting from 16.07.2023 to 15.07.2029 and
with a further order to cancel the candidature in all examination in
which Petitioners have approached w.e.f.16.07.2023 to the date of
passing of the order.
3. Learned Sr. Counsel appearing for the Petitioners in the present
batch of writ petitions, contended that initially the Commission issued
an advertisement on 02.11.2022 inviting applications to fill up 1008
posts of Junior Engineer (Civil) through direct recruitment. In
pursuance of the said advertisement, all the Petitioners participated in
the preliminary examination so held on 04.06.2023.
3.1. While Petitioner in W.P.(C) No. 14056 of 2025 qualified in the
preliminary examination, result of which was published on
// 3 //
17.06.2023, Petitioners in W.P.(C) Nos. 16050, 16595 & 19076 of
2025 could not qualify in the preliminary examination.
3.2. It is contended that after publication of the result of the
preliminary examination so held on 04.06.023 on 17.06.2023, in terms
of the advertisement, the qualified candidates appeared the main
written examination so held on 16.07.2023. However, the Commission
vide its notice dtd.23.07.2023, cancelled the main written examination
held on 16.07.2023 and in the said notice it was proposed to hold the
main written examination afresh on 03.09.2023.
3.3. However, prior to such conduct of the main written examination
afresh so fixed to 03.09.2023, basing on the report submitted by the
Superintendent of Police, Balasore and further report submitted by the
Superintendent of Police on 28.07.2023, basing on the report of the
Inspector-in-Charge, Sahadevkhunta Police Station dtd.27.07.2023
regarding involvement of 17 nos. of accused persons with regard to
leaking of the question papers of the Main written examination so held
on 16.07.2023, all the Petitioners were issued with the show-cause on
28.07.2023 in terms of the provisions contained under Rule 18 of the
Odisha Staff Selection Commission Rules, 1993 (in short Rules).
// 4 //
3.4. It is contended that such a show-cause was issued inter alia with
the allegation that the Petitioners have illegal access of the question
papers of the main written examination held on 16.07.2023.
3.5. It is contended that Petitioners even though submitted their reply
to the show-cause notice dtd.28.07.2023 before the Secretary of the
Commission and in their replies, it was clearly indicated that
Petitioners are having no illegal access to the question papers of the
main written examination held on 16.07.2023, but without proper
appreciation of the reply so submitted, the main written examination
was conducted afresh on 03.09.2023. Those of the candidates who had
qualified the preliminary examination, result of which was published
on 17.06.2023, were allowed to take part in the main written
examination conducted afresh on 03.09.2023. However, after
publication of the result of the main written examination on
30.09.2023 and verification of the documents of the selected
candidates on 11.10.2023, the Commission published the final result
of 1008 selected candidates as against 1008 posts of Junior Engineer
(Civil) so advertised. Even though the Commission published the
final select list of 1008 candidates, but 950 selected candidates were
issued with the order of appointment and result of 58 candidates
including the Petitioners was kept withheld.
// 5 //
3.6. It is contended that even though result of 58 selected candidates
was kept withheld including that of the Petitioners because of their
alleged involvement in leakage of the question paper of the main
written examination held on 16.07.2023, but the I.O. in
Sahadevkhunta P.S. Case No. 303 dtd.16.07.2023 while submitting
the final form on 10.11.2023, never charge-sheeted the present
Petitioners.
3.7. It is however contended that challenging such action of the
Commission in cancelling the main written examination held on
16.07.2023, various writ petitions were filed in W.P.(C) No. 28269 of
2023 & batch. This Court vide order dtd.31.08.2023 while permitting
the Petitioners therein to appear the main written examination to be
held afresh on 03.09.2023, observed that their result shall be subject to
the final outcome of W.P.(C) No. 28269 of 2023. In the said order this
Court further observed that the Commission shall continue with the
proceeding initiated against the candidates with issuance of the show-
cause so issued, but no final order shall be passed by the Commission
without leave of this Court.
// 6 //
3.8. It is however contended that W.P.(C) No. 28269 of 2023 & batch
were disposed of finally vide order dtd.06.03.2024 with the following
direction so contained in Para 10:-
"10. In the aforesaid factual backdrop, this Court permits the
I.O. to continue with the investigation with a direction to
conclude the same as expeditiously as possible by covering all
angles of conspiracies. Further, this Court also directs the
OSSC to finalize the proceeding initiated by issuing show cause
notice to the Petitioners to which the Petitioners have already
filed their reply. In the event, it is found that the Petitioners are
in no way involved in the leakage of the question papers, then
such proceeding be dropped and the results of the examination
which was held on 03.09.2023 in respect of the present
petitioners be published within a six weeks from the date of
communication of a copy of this order. Furthermore, in the
event it is found that the Petitioners have come out successfully
in the written examination and the proceeding against them are
dropped as directed hereinabove, then the OSSC shall proceed
in their matter for publication of their final result by taking the
necessary and consequential steps to conclude the recruitment
process in respect of those Petitioners. Consequently, if it is
found that the Petitioners are finally selected, then the pendency
of the criminal case shall not stand in the way of the Petitioners
being considered for appointment to the post of Junior Engineer
(Civil)."
3.9. It is contended that challenging the common order passed by this
Court on 06.03.2024, the Commission filed Writ Appeal No. 1296 of
2024. The Writ Appeal in question was disposed of without
// 7 //
interfering with order dtd.06.03.2024 vide order dt.30.04.2025 with
the following observation so contained in Para 8 & 9:-
"8. The language used in the aforementioned paragraphs leaves
no ambiguity that the Court refused to interfere with the show
cause notice and directed the authorities to proceed in
investigating such serious issues and in pursuit thereof, such
observation came to be made. Since there was a serious
allegation of the leakage of the question papers and an access to
the leaked question papers, the Single Bench observed that it
does not appear prima facie case is made out for involvement in
leakage of the question papers. Such observation is tentative in
nature and cannot receive any sanctity being susceptible to non-
interference at the investigation stage. The observation made by
the Single Bench expressing the prima facie opinion is never
regarded as final which would further be evident from the
observations made in paragraph-10 of the impugned order
wherein it is held that in the event the writ petitioners are found
in no way involved in the leakage of the question papers, then
the proceeding should be dropped.
9. In such view of the matter, since the finding on leakage of
question papers and its involvement is still left open to the
Investigating Officer, we do not find that such observation
would create an absolute brindle and/or fetter on the part of the
authorities in deciding the issues in accordance with the
statutory provisions applicable in this regard."
3.10. It is contended that on the face of the order passed by this Court
on 06.03.2024 in W.P.(C) No. 28269 of 2023 & batch and further
order passed in Writ Appeal No. 1296 of 2024 and the fact that the
// 8 //
Petitioners were not charge-sheeted by the I.O. in Sahadevkhunta P.S.
Case No. 303 dtd.16.07.2023, those of the Petitioners who have
qualified the main written examination held afresh on 06.09.2023,
should have been provided with the order of appointment with
dropping of the proceeding so initiated vide show-cause
dt.28.07.2023. Instead of doing so, when the Commission issued a
fresh advertisement on 14.03.2024, Petitioners also participated in the
said selection process by appearing the preliminary examination. But,
in the meantime vide the impugned order dtd.12.05.2025, so
impugned in the present batch of writ petitions, Petitioners have been
debarred to take part in any examination conducted by the
Commission for a period of 6 years for the period from 16.07.2023 to
15.07.2029 and the examination they have taken w.e.f.16.07.2023
were declared as cancelled.
3.11. Because of the nature of the impugned order passed on
12.05.2025, final result of the Petitioners pursuant to the fresh
advertisement issued on 14.03.2024 was also not published, even
though Petitioners after qualifying the preliminary examination so
held on 18.05.2025, were allowed to take part in the main written
examination.
// 9 //
3.12. While assailing the impugned order dtd.12.05.2025 so impugned
in the present batch of writ petitions, it is contended that pursuant to
the advertisement issued initially by the Commission on 02.11.2022,
the main written examination held on 16.07.2023 was cancelled
because of initiation of Sahadevkhunta P.S. Case No. 303
dtd.16.07.2023 and the report submitted by the Superintendent of
Police, Balasore on 23.07.2023 as well as 28.07.2023. Because of the
initiation of the proceeding in Sahadevkhunta P.S. Case No. 303
dtd.16.07.2023, the main written examination held on 16.07.2023 was
cancelled by the Commission vide notice dtd.28.07.2023 and the main
written examination was held afresh on 03.09.2023.
3.13. In the main written examination, result of which was published
on 30.09.2023, even though Petitioners qualified ad allowed to take
part in the verification of documents, but on the face of the publication
of the final result on 04.11.2023, appointment of 58 selected
candidates including that of the Petitioners was withheld because of
the show-cause notice issued by the Commission on 28.07.2023.
3.14. It is contended that result of the Petitioners was withheld
because of their implication in Sahadevkhunta P.S. Case No. 303
dtd.16.07.2023. However, since in the charge-sheet so filed,
// 10 //
Petitioners have not been charge-sheeted, the ground on which the
impugned order dtd.12.05.2025 has been passed is not sustainable in
the eye of law.
3.15. It is further contended that since Petitioners have not been
charge-sheeted by the I.O. after completion of the investigation, it is to
be held that Petitioners are not involved in the alleged leakage of the
question paper of the main written examination initially held on
16.07.2023.
3.16. It is also contended that pursuant to order dtd.16.09.2025 in
W.P.(C) No. 14056 of 2025, I.O. in Sahadevkhunta P.S. Case No. 303
dtd.16.07.2023 while appearing before this Court on 22.09.2025
clearly contended that no material has been found against the present
Petitioners. Not only that pursuant to order dtd.22.09.2025, the I.O.
filed an affidavit before this Court on 26.09.2025. In the said affidavit
it was clearly indicated that Petitioners have not been charge-sheeted
in Sahadevkhunta P.S. Case No. 303 dtd.16.07.2023. Order passed by
this Court on 22.09.2025, 25.09.2025 and 26.09.2025 in W.P.(C) No.
14056 of 2025 reads as follows:-
"22.09.2025
2. Heard.
// 11 //
3. Pursuant to the order dtd.16.09.2025, Mr. Bikash Ranjan
Behura, I.O of the case appeared in person and contended that
since some of the accused persons are resident of Andhra
Pradesh and Bihar final charge sheet could not be filed and
accordingly preliminary charge sheet was filed by keeping the
investigation open.
4. However, it is contended that during course of investigation,
no material has been found against the present petitioner till
now. I.O is directed to file an affidavit in that regard.
5. List this matter on 25th September, 2025. Personal
appearance of the Officer concerned is dispensed with.
xxx xxx xxx
25.09.2025
2. Heard learned counsel appearing for the Parties.
3. Pursuant to the order dtd.22.09.2025, learned Addl.
Government Advocate produced the memo enclosing the letter
issued by the I.O of the case on 23.09.2025. This Court is of the
view that I.O. was directed to file an affidavit, taking into
account the submission made by him before this Court on
22.09.2025.
4. In view of the nature of order passed by this Court on
22.09.2025, this Court is not inclined to accept the memo with
the letter enclosed thereto.
5. Considering the nature of order passed by this Court on
22.09.2025, this Court directs for personal appearance of the
I.O. tomorrow (25.09.2025).
6. List this matter tomorrow (26.09.2025).
// 12 //
xxx xxx xxx
26.09.2025
2. Heard learned counsel for the parties.
3. Pursuant to order dated 25.09.2025, Mr. Bikash Ranjan
Behura, I.O. in CID, CB P.S. Case No.15 of 2023 corresponding
to Sahadevkhunta PS Case No.303 of 2023, files an additional
affidavit incorporating the submission made by him before this
Court on 22.09.2025. Copy of the affidavit so filed in Court be
kept in record. Copy of the affidavit is also provided to the
learned counsel for the petitioner in Court.
4. In view of the affidavit filed, this Court is inclined to list this
matter on 15.10.2025.
Personal appearance of the officer is dispensed with."
3.17. Making all these submissions, learned Sr. Counsel appearing for
the Petitioners contended that since Petitioners have not been charge-
sheeted with regard to their alleged involvement in leakage of the
question papers of the main written examination held on 16.07.2023,
those of the Petitioners who have qualified and whose names find
place in the final select list so published on 04.11.2023, be provided
with the order of appointment. Those of the Petitioners who have not
qualified in the main written examination held afresh on 06.09.2023
with publication of the result on 04.11.2023, their result be published
in respect of the subsequent recruitment held pursuant to
// 13 //
advertisement dtd.14.03.2024 with quashing of the impugned order
dtd.12.05.2025.
4. Mr. S. Swain, learned counsel appearing for the Commission on the
other hand made his submission basing on the stand taken in the
counter affidavit so filed by Opp. Party No. 2. It is contended that
pursuant to the advertisement issued on 02.11.2022, the preliminary
examination was held on 04.06.2023. Result of the preliminary
examination was published vide notification dtd.17.06.2023 and in the
preliminary examination so held, 5014 candidates were short listed to
take the main written examination to be held on 16.07.2023. It is
contended that the main written examination was also held on
16.07.2023 in 14 different examination centers of the State.
4.1. However, because of the initiation of Sahadevkhunta P.S. Case
No. 303 dtd.16.07.2023 and the report submitted by the
Superintendent of Police, Balasore vide his letter dtd.23.07.2023, the
main written examination held on 16.07.2023 was cancelled by the
Commission vide notification dtd.23.07.2023. After such cancellation
of the main written examination held on 16.07.2023, the same was
held afresh on 03.09.2023.
// 14 //
4.2. It is contended that taking into account the report submitted by the
Superintendent of Police, Balasore vide his letter dtd.23.07.2023 and
27.07.2023, Petitioners herein were issued with the show-cause by the
Commission on 28.07.2023 inter alia in terms of the provisions
contained under Rule 18 of the 1993 Rules. Rule 18 of the Rules reads
as follows:-
"18. Penalty.- A candidate who is or has been declared by the
Commission to be guilty of-
(i) obtaining support for his candidature by any means; or
(ii) impersonation; or
(iii) procuring impersonation by any person; or
(iv) submitting fabricated documents, or documents which have
been tampered with; or
(v) making statements which are incorrect or false or suppressing
material information; or
(vi) resorting to any other irregular or improper means in
connection with his candidature for the examination; or
(vii) adopting unfair means during the examination; or
(viii) writing obscene language or pronographic matter, in the
scripts; or
(ix) misbehaving with the fellow examiners or the invigilators in
any manner in the examination hall; or
(x) harassing or causing bodily harm to the staff employed/engaged
by the Commission for the conduct of the examination; or
(xi) violating any of the instructions contained in the admission
certificates; or
(xii) attempting to commit or, as the case may be, abetting the
Commission of all or any of the acts specified in the foregoing
clauses shall be liable-
// 15 //
(a) to be disqualified by the Commission from the examination for
which he is candidate;
(b) to be debarred, either permanently or for a specified period-
(i) by the Commission, from appearing in any examination or
selection held by them; or
(ii) by the State Government, from entering to any employment
under them; or
(c) if he is already in service under Government to disciplinary
action under the appropriate rules :
Provided that no penalty under this rule shall be imposed except
after-
(i) giving the candidate an opportunity of making such
representation to the Commission or Government, as the case may
be, in writing as he may wish to make in that behalf ; and
(ii) taking into consideration the representation, if any, submitted
by the candidate within the period allowed to him by the
Commission or the Government, as the case may be."
4.3. It is contended that Petitioners were issued with the show-cause
on 28.07.2023 in terms of the provisions contained under Rule
18(i)(vi)(vii) of the Rules. It is further contended that after receipt of
the reply to the show-cause notices issued on 28.07.2023, in terms of
the provisions contained under Rule 18(a) & (b) of the Rules, all the
Petitioners have been debarred to appear in any examination
conducted by the Commission for a period of 6 years vide the
impugned order dtd.12.05.2025, for the period from 16.07.2023 to
15.07.2029 and their candidature in any examination held
w.e.f.16.07.2023 stand cancelled.
// 16 //
4.4. Learned counsel appearing for the Commission contended that
since Petitioners were involved in Sahadevkhunta P.S. Case No. 303
dtd.16.07.2023, and some of the Petitioners were also found to have
access to the question papers of the main written examination held on
16.07.2023 basing on the report submitted by the Superintendent of
Police, Balasore on 27.07.2023, Petitioners were issued with the
show-causes on 28.07.2023. Report of the Superintendent of Police,
Balasore dtd.27.07.2023 reads as follows:-
"Respected Sir,
In inviting the above case and reference, I beg to report
that, on 16.07.2023 at 02.00 PM informant Mukunda Murari
Patra (35), S/O- Prabhakar Patra of village- Budamara, PS-
Ghagarbeda, Dist- Mayurbhanj, At/Pre-S1 of Police, Model P.S
Sahadevkhunta Balasore, reported at P.S in writing that on
16.07.2023 at about 03.00 AM while he along with staff were
performing night patrolling duty at Naharapatna Chhak on NH-
60 received credible information from source that one
Ayushman Bus and two numbers of other vehicles are coming
from Bhubaneswar side and going towards Udaypur beach
area, Talasari approaching NH-16/60 road fill with aspirants of
Odisha Staff Selection Commission regarding JE (Mains) and
CGL, Examination for Mal practice in previously arranged
hotel at Talasari Marine area. Getting this information, he
discussed with IIC, where he directed Compit to detect them and
to follow them till their apprehension. They keep watch over the
vehicles at NH-16 and as per information receipt could able to
detect one Renault Tiber car bearing Regd. No. OD-02CE-1345
// 17 //
and stopped there. In that vehicle they found three numbers of
suspects and two job aspirants are sitting inside the car. Being
asked the suspect they disclosed their name and address namely
1. Biswaranjan Mohapatra (39), S/o- Abhinna Ku.Mohapatra,
Vill- Mangalanagar, PS- Khurda Town, Dist- Khurda, 2. MD K
Sidhique (38), S/o- L1. Md. Mustafa Sidique, Vill- Mulagada,
PS- Gajuwaka, Dist- Vishakhapatna, Andhra Pradesh and 3.
Saina Parwin (29), W/o- Abdul Sarbar Khan, Vill-Sonpur, PS-
Kishore Nagar, Dist-Cuttack along. Being asked both the job
seekers disclosed their name and address as (i) Susama Behera
(38), D/O- Kannduri Charan Behera of Sidheswarpur, Cuttack
and (ii) Himanshu Bhusan Samal (33), S/o- Harekrushna Samal
of village- Jaripal, Dhenkanal stated that these three accused
persons taking them to a lonely place near Talasari Marine
beach to provide question paper and answer sheets for today's
JE (Mains)/CGL examination identifying as they are high
ranked Govt. officer in Odisha Govt and they will provide Govt.
Job under Odisha Government. Also stated that other co
accused and nearly more that hundreds job seekers are also
present at the destination point ie near Talsari Marine Beach.
Further, they stated that accused Biswaranjan Mohapatra has
forcefully kept their original certificates to provide job. Hence
on personal search of accused Biswaranjan Mohapatra found
one original Matric certificate vide Srl No. M 0559659, Matric
mark sheet, one original diploma certificate with mark sheet and
admit card of OSSC Main Written examination of combined
Technical Services Recruitment Examination to be held on
today, 16.07.2023 of Job seeker namely Sushama Behera and
one original Matric Certificate vide Srl No. M 1672228 and
original Diploma Certificate (Civil Engineering) vide Srl No.
10/223858 of job seeker Himanshu Bhusan Samal. Hence he
seized the above certificate from the possession of accused
Biswaranjan Mohapatra in presence of witnesses and prepared
// 18 //
seizure list. Intimated this fact to IIC and other senior officers
and requested to IIC to send two more teams as well as to
inform IIC Talasari Marine P.S to assist me for apprehension of
the culprits at Talasari area. Then our police teams along with
the accused persons proceeded to Talasari Marine beach area
and could able to caught hold 6 accused persons and also found
hundreds of job aspirants there. Being asked the culprits, they
disclosed their name and address as 4. Bijendra Kumar (39),
S/o- Baleswar Sah of Serpur, PS- Vidyapatinagar, Dist-
Samastipur, 5. Deepak Kumar (25), S/O- Late Devnibas Kumar,
At- Hanuman Nagar, Po- Lohiya Nagar, PS- Patrakarnagar,
Dist- Patna, 6. Ajay Kumar (31), S/o- Jagrish Prasad, Vill-
Devria, PS-Ghosi, Dist- Jalanabad, 7. Raj Kumar Singh (36),
S/o- Sitaram Singh, Vill- Mathurapur Colony, PS-Dalmianagar,
Dist- Rohatas, all of State-Bihar 8. Md. Kamiruddin (38), S/o-
Md. Kalimuddin, and 9. Mustakim Khan, S/o- Abu Mutahar
Khan both of Dumduma, PO/PS- Khandagiri, Dist- Khurda.
Then personal search of accused persons was conducted and
found Blank Rs. 10/- India Non Judicial stamp paper which
seems to be forge one, blank signed Cheques of aspirants and
huge numbers of valuable documents from their possession.
Seized one Renault Triber Regd. No- OD-02-CE-1345, Suzuki
Ignis Car-Regd. No-BR-01FT-701, Scorpio Black color-BR 01-
FZ-7272, Alto Regd. No-OD-21-3067, etc from the possession of
accused persons. All the accused persons demanded Rs. 18
Lakhs per aspirants to provide Govt. Job under Govt. Of
Odisha. After verifying the documents of the aspirants, left them
at spot. Hence, he returned to P.S along with accused persons,
seized materials and submitted this written report before IIC for
taking necessary legal action at this end.
Basing on this written report, Shri Subhranshu Sekhar
Nayak, IIC Model P.S Sahadevkhunta registered P.S Case No.
// 19 //
303 Dt. 16.07.2023 U/S-419/420/467/468/34 IPC and directed
me to take up investigation of the case.
During course of investigation, I have examined the
Complt. and other witnesses, visited the spot and examined the
other seizure witnesses who well proved the occurrence. On
examination of job aspirants, they supported the entire fact and
further added that, they were brought to Talasari beach for
discussion for proving the govt. Job under Govt. of Odisha, for
ongoing examinations under OSSC, etc. For that reason, the
accused persons were took their original certificates and
demanded Rs. 18 Lakhs per persons. As such the original
documents, blank signed cheques, blank India Non judicial
stamp paper, vehicles, mobile phones, cash of the job seekers
were seized from the possession of accused persons in presence
of witnesses. During interrogation of accused Biswaranjan
Mohapatra and others they confessed their guilt and stated that
they conjointly came to Talasari and called the job seekers to
provide the Govt. Job introducing themselves as high positioned
Govt. officials with intension to cheat them and to dope their
money.
During investigation so far it established that, the question
paper was leaked by Birendra Singh one of the workers of the
printing press where the question paper was being printed.
Virendra Singh, who originally belongs to Bihar & is working
as a Machine operator in Janaki image Printing press, Kolkata,
which was being used by OSSC for printing the question papers.
He came in contact with the mastermind Vishal Kumar, who
belongs to the same place as Birendra Singh. Accused Birendra
and Vishal have known to each other since 2 months, during
which Vishal proposed to Birendra to supply him any relevant
information regarding the question papers being printed at his
printing press. On 11th July, 2023, when Vishal received
// 20 //
confirmation that the question paper related to JE (Mains)
Civils examination to be conducted by OSSC on 16th July, 2023
is available, he contacted Bijendra Kumar (his main associate),
who has already been apprehended from the spot on 16th July,
while distributing the question papers.
The Modus Operandi of the racket is trying to get their
hands on the question paper after the final copy is printed and
before it is sent to the respective examination controller by the
printing press. They then take away the original certificates of
the candidates and provide them with the leaked question paper.
After the exams were over, if the questions matched, the
candidates were asked to pay half the amount instantly and the
other half after the results are declared. In this instance, the
initial investigation reveal that there was no money transaction
occurred between the accused and the candidates, as at the time
of the raid the examination was yet to be conducted.
In this connection total 17 numbers of accused persons
were arrested including mastermind for leaking the OSSC
question papers and forwarded them to court.
During raid at Talasari area, found the below noted OSSC
JE Mains civil aspirants were at present with the arrested
accused persons on 15-16/07/2023 and got question papers of
JE mains examination before attending the examination, which
was held on 16.07.2023."
4.5. It is also contended that even though in the charge sheet so
submitted by the I.O. in Sahadevkhunta P.S. Case No. 303
dtd.16.07.2023, Petitioners have not been charge-sheeted, but the
investigation has been kept upon and the charge sheet so filed is in the
// 21 //
nature of a preliminary charge sheet. It is accordingly contended that
even though Petitioners have not been charge-sheeted in the final form
so submitted on 10.11.2023 and the I.O. accordingly made his
statement before this Court on his appearance on 22.09.2025, but
since the investigation has been kept upon, it cannot be held that
Petitioners are not involved with regard to leakage of the question
paper of the main written examination held initially on 16.07.2023.
4.6. Learned counsel appearing for the Commission also contended
that taking into account the involvement of the Petitioners with regard
to leakage of the question papers of the main written examination held
on 16.07.2023 and after going through the reply so submitted by the
Petitioners to the show-cause notice dtd.28.07.2023, the Commission
has rightly passed the impugned order dtd.12.05.2025, by debarring
the Petitioners to appear in any examination conducted by the
Commission for a period of 6 years for the period 16.07.2023 to
15.07.2029. It is accordingly contended that Petitioners are not
eligible and entitled to get the benefit of selection and appointment, if
any, either pursuant to the initial advertisement issued by the
Commission on 02.11.2022 or in respect of the subsequent
advertisement issued by the Commission on 14.03.2024. It is also
contended that pursuant to the interim order passed by this Court,
// 22 //
Petitioners have not taken part in the main written examination
pursuant to the advertisement issued on 14.03.2024.
4.7. Learned counsel appearing for the Commission in support of his
aforesaid submission, relied on a decision rendered by the Bombay
High Court reported in 2008 SCC Online Bombay 476. The High
Court at Bombay in Para 57 and 78 of the judgment has held as
follows:-
"57. In this case, sufferance of prejudice has been vehemently
argued. That prejudice is that the petitioners are blacklisted and
debarred from appearing and hence, will not be public servants
in future. Sufferance is not shown to be based upon any act of
the MPSC by which, their innocence, hitherto concealed, could
have been otherwise brought out. Every candidate who follows
dubious means must suffer his fate by punishment. That is not
sufferance of prejudice. The entire concept is completely
misconceived. Sufferance of prejudice essentially requires the
petitioners to show the evidence which, if seen by the
departmental authority, would have proved their innocence. The
specimen handwriting in this case shows otherwise. It has seen
that the petitioners' specimen handwritings have, in fact, sealed
their fate. They have got the punishment they deserved upon the
evidence being considered. The punishment is not prejudice. The
Supreme Court has laid down the test of prejudice suffered by a
party by non-compliance of rules of natural justice as the only
reason to merit interference by Courts. No prejudice suffered is
shown in this case. No interference is merited.
xxx xxx xxx
// 23 //
78. The petitioners do not deserve to be public officers. The
petitioners have indulged in malpractice. They have colluded
with the other public officers of the same hue and colour. The
least punishment that can be meted out upon the petitioners is to
keep them away from public service. The MPSC has been more
than fair. The MPSC has acted upon anonymous complaints. It
has conducted a preliminary enquiry. It has removed the chaff
from the grain. It has issued notices only upon the candidates
who have been found to be tainted. It has not held back the
results of those who did not indulge in any malpractice. It has
issued not one, but three notices upon the petitioners until now.
It has considered not one, but three replies of the petitioners. It
has passed a reasoned order as directed. The order shows how
the original answer sheets have been changed at the instance of
the petitioners and for their own benefit; that the marks have
been increased; that there is a difference in the handwriting in
the answer sheets and the samples of their handwritings; that
the petitioners have acted in collusion with certain officers
mentioned therein; that the petitioners have admitted the
payment of illegal gratification. The order further shows not
only the act of the answer sheets having been changed but the
intention of the petitioners behind the act and the benefit they
sought to derive therefrom and the consequent presumption
which follows as "a common course of natural events and
human conduct" by "applying a process of intelligent reasoning
of the mind of a prudent man under similar circumstances", as
cited in the case of T. Shankar Prasad (supra)."
5. To the submission made by the learned counsel appearing for the
Commission, learned Sr. Counsel appearing for the Petitioners made
further submission contending inter alia that because of their
// 24 //
implication in Sahadevkhunta P.S. Case No. 303 dtd.16.07.2023 not
only the Petitioners those who have qualified the main written
examination held afresh on 03.09.2023 have been debarred from
getting the benefit of appointment basing on the final select list
published on 04.11.2023, but also Petitioners on the face of the
interim order passed in various writ petitions, were not allowed to
appear the main written examination in terms of the advertisement
issued on 14.03.2024.
5.1. It is contended that since I.O. on his appearance before this Court
on 22.09.2025, clearly contended that no material has been found
against the present Petitioners till now, even though the investigation
has been kept upon, but since no material has been found against the
Petitioners as yet, those of the Petitioners who have qualified the main
written examination held afresh on 03.09.2023 with publication of the
final result on 04.11.2023 are entitled to be provided with the order of
appointment with quashing of the impugned order dt.12.05.2025.
5.2. It is also contended that since on the face of the interim order
passed, in some of the writ petitions Petitioners were not allowed to
take part in the main written examination held pursuant to the
subsequent advertisement issued on 14.03.2024, the Commission be
// 25 //
directed to hold a special examination for them by allowing them to
appear the main written examination.
5.3. It is also contended that on the face of the order passed by this
Court on 06.03.2024 in W.P.(C) No. 28269 of 2023 & batch and the
order passed in Writ Appeal No. 1296 of 2024 and the fact that
Petitioners have not been charge sheeted, there was no occasion on the
part of the Commission to debar the Petitioners to appear in any of the
examination conducted by the Commission for a period of 6 years
w.e.f.16.07.2023 to 15.07.2029 and by cancelling the examination
undertaken by the Petitioner w.e.f.16.07.2023 till the date of order on
dt.12.05.2025.
5.4. It is also contended that as alleged original certificates of the
Petitioners were never seized from the possession of the main
conspirators of the I.O. and Petitioners are having their original
certificates in their possession. (Learned counsel appearing for the
Petitioners also produced the original certificates of the Petitioners in
Court for perusal).
5.5. It is accordingly contended that since nothing has been found as
against the Petitioners, as yet on the face of the preliminary charge
sheet submitted on 13.11.2023, there is no meaning in keeping the
// 26 //
investigation open. Learned Sr. Counsel accordingly contended that
the Commission be directed to publish the result of the main written
examination held on 03.09.2023 and provide appointment to the
eligible Petitioners. Therefore, if the Petitioners who have not
qualified the main written examination held on 03.09.2023, they be
allowed to take the main written examination in terms of the
subsequent advertisement issued on 14.03.2024.
6. Learned Addl. Govt. Advocate on the other hand contended that
since investigation has been kept open, it cannot be held that
Petitioners have no implicity in the alleged crime. It is also contended
that some of the candidates prior to taking the main written
examination so held initially on 16.07.2023, had conspired the charge
sheeted accused persons for having access to the question paper of the
main written examination held on 16.07.2023.
With regard to the aforesaid submission, reliance was placed to
the report submitted by the I.O. of the case on 23.09.2025. Relevant
extract of the report of the I.O. reads as follows:-
"Investigation conducted so far does not reveal
complicity of any Govt. Officials of OSSC involved in the
process of entrusting such work to the printing press.
Moreover, no evidence could be elicited till now against
candidates of the examination for direct involvement in
the leakage of question paper and conspiracy with the
// 27 //
principal accused persons, although they were involved
for getting access to the question paper. Further
investigation is continuing on this score. Investigation is
also continuing to collect more evidence relating to
inter-state nexus of the crime and arrest of out of the
state accused persons."
7. Having heard learned counsel appearing for the Parties and
considering the submission made, this Court finds that the
Commission initially issued an advertisement on 02.11.2022 inviting
applications to fill up 1008 posts of Junior Engineer (Civil). The
preliminary examination pursuant to such advertisement issued on
02.11.2022 was held on 04.06.2023. Result of the preliminary
examination was published vide notification dtd.17.06.2023 and 5014
candidates were short listed to appear the main written examination.
The main written examination accordingly was held on 16.07.2023.
7.1. However, because of initiation of Sahadevkhunta P.S. Case No.
303 dtd.16.07.2023 and the report submitted by Superintendent of
Police, Balasore on 23.07.2023, the Commission vide notification
dtd.23.07.2023 cancelled the main written examination held on
16.07.2023. The main written examination was subsequently re-
scheduled to be held on 03.09.2023. Basing on such main written
examination held afresh on 03.09.2023, the final result of 2030
candidates was published on 30.09.2023. All those short-listed
// 28 //
candidates were called for certificate verification so held during the
period from 09.10.2023 to 19.10.2023. The final result of the
examination was published vide notification dtd.04.11.2023.
7.2. However, taking into account the nature of order passed by this
Court on 31.08.2023 in W.P.(C) No. 28269 of 2023 and batch, the
result of 58 candidates which include the present Petitioners, was
withheld. As found, vide order dtd.06.03.2024, this Court disposed of
W.P.(C) No. 28269 of 2023 & batch. Vide the said order this Court
held that if Petitioners are no way involved in the leakage of the
question papers, then the proceeding initiated against them be dropped
and result of the examination, which was held afresh on 03.09.2023 be
published.
7.3. Challenging such order passed by this Court on 06.03.2024, the
Commission moved this Court in Writ Appeal No. 1296 of 2024. The
Writ Appeal was disposed of on 30.04.2025 with the observation that
since leakage of the question paper and the involvement of the
Petitioners has been left upon for further investigation, the
Commission is free to decide the issue in accordance with the
statutory provision so applicable. After such disposal of the Writ
Appeal, the Commission passed the impugned order on 12.05.2025 by
// 29 //
debarring the Petitioners to appear in any of the examination
conducted by the Commission for a period of 6 years i.e.16.07.2023 to
15.07.2029.
7.4. It is found that pursuant to letter issued by the Superintendent of
Police, Balasore on 23.07.2023 with cancellation of the result of the
main written examination held on 16.07.2023, Petitioners were issued
with the show-cause by the Commission in terms of the provisions
contained under Rule 18 of the 1993 Rules. However, vide impugned
order dtd.12.05.2025 Petitioners herein have been debarred to appear
in any of the examination conducted by the Commission for a period
of 6 years i.e. from 16.07.2023 to 15.07.2029.
7.5. This Court taking into account the fact that Petitioners have not
yet been charge sheeted in Sahadevkhunta P.S. Case No. 303
dtd.16.07.2023, pending further investigation, is of the view that the
impugned order passed by the Commission in debarring the
Petitioners to appear in any of the examination conducted by the
Commission for a period of 6 years from 16.07.2023 to 15.07.2029 is
disproportionate to the alleged misconduct of the Petitioners. Not only
that the stand that the original documents of some of the Petitioners
// 30 //
were seized by the I.O. on 16.07.2023 is also not acceptable as the
Petitioners produced their original certificates in Court for perusal.
7.6. However, taking into account initiation of Sahadevkhunta P.S.
Case No. 303 dtd.16.07.2023 and the report submitted by the
Superintendent of Police, Balasore on 23.07.2023 and 27.07.2023 and
the fact that investigation of the case has been kept open with
submission of the preliminary charge sheet, this Court is not inclined
to direct for publication of the result of the Petitioners who have taken
the main written examination so held on 03.09.2023 pursuant to
advertisement dtd.02.11.2022.
7.7. Similarly, since pursuant to the subsequent advertisement issued
on 14.03.2024, Petitioners have not appeared the main written
examination so held on the face of the interim order passed in some of
the writ petitions, this Court is not inclined to direct the Commission
to hold a special examination for them. However, taking into account
the fact that Petitioners have not been charge sheeted and no material
having been found against them as yet, this Court is of the view that
the impugned order passed by the Commission on 12.05.2025 in
debarring the Petitioners to appear in any examination conducted by
// 31 //
the Commission for a period of 6 years w.e.f.16.07.2023 to
15.07.2029 is not just and proper.
7.8. Therefore, this Court while interfering with the impugned order
dt.12.05.2025 with quashing of the same, is of the view that, result of
the Petitioners who have taken the main written examination held
afresh on 03.09.2023 be published by the Commission, if they were
not charge-sheeted with completion of the investigation so kept open
in Sahadevkhunta P.S. Case No. 303 dtd.16.07.2023 by June, 2026.
On such publication of the result, consequential follow-up action be
taken to provide appointment to the Petitioners who come out
successful in all respect.
7.9. This Court however is not inclined to direct the Commission to
hold the main written examination afresh for the Petitioners in respect
of the selection process initiated pursuant to the subsequent
advertisement issued on 14.03.2024. Those of the Petitioners are free
to take part in any further recruitment to be conducted by the
Commission.
7.10. It is however observed that impugned order dt.12.05.2025 so
passed by the Commission and quashed by this Court, will stand
automatically revived in case of the Petitioners, who will be charge-
// 32 //
sheeted upon completion of the investigation in Sahadevkhunta P.S.
Case No. 303 dtd.16.07.2023.
8. All the writ petitions accordingly stand disposed of with the
aforesaid observation and direction. Interim orders of any nature
passed in all the writ petitions stand vacated.
(BIRAJA PRASANNA SATAPATHY)
Judge
Orissa High Court, Cuttack
Dated the 20th January, 2026/Sneha
Location: High Court of Orissa, Cuttack
