GUNANIDHI MARTHA Vs. GOVERNMENT OF ORISSA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE order dated 18th January, 1996 passed by the Orissa Administrative Tribunal is under challenge in these appeals. THE controversy relates to selection of Police Constables for training for further promotion to the rank of Lance Naik. Admittedly in the Police Manual, there is no provision for regulating the selection of Police Constables for training for promotion to the rank of Lance Naik, however, the same is regulated by the Police Order No. 266 of 1981 in which criteria for selection of candidates and procedure have been prescribed. According to the Police Order, a Constable can be promoted to the rank of Lance Naik provided : (1) he has put in three years' service after recruits training; (ii) is below 35 years of age; (iii) has passed the district drill test; and (iv) has a good record of service. THE Selection Board constituted as per the aforesaid Police Order would conduct the test. THE subjects on which the test is to be conducted as specified in the said Order are as stated below:- THE pass marks on out-door and indoor subjects would be 50% i.e. 80 marks."

(2.) THE said Order spells out that the size of the Select List should be one and half times the number of anticipated vacancies. Since the number of expected vacancies in .the post of Lance Naik was 24, a Select List of 36 candidates was to be prepared. 100 eligible Constables were called for promotional test. In the test,' 57 candidates were selected for promotional post on the basis of the 50% aggregate marks secured by them irrespective of the marks secured in the individual items of both outdoor and indoor tests and marks awarded in the miscellaneous test. A list of 36 candidates was prepared for training to the promotional post on the basis of the highest aggregate marks secured by them. THE validity of the Select List of 36 candidates prepared for the training for further promotion to the post of Lance Naik was questioned before the Tribunal on the ground that the Select List should have been prepared on the basis of the length of seniority in the rank of Constables. An application was filed before the Tribunal for intervention which was allowed and the intervenors were arrayed as respondents 4 to 13 before the Tribunal. THE Tribunal, after considering rival contentions and respective submissions passed the order directing as under:-

(3.) SHRI Janarjan Das, the learned counsel for the appellants in Civil Appeal No. 861 of 1998 while supporting the argument of SHRI Parekh, the learned counsel for the appellants in Civil Appeal No. 860 of 1998, so far it related to securing 50% marks in aggregate in out-door and indoor tests without insisting upon securing of 50% marks in each individual subject in out-door and indoor tests, submitted that once the candidates are selected on the basis of marks secured by them irrespective of the aggregate marks secured, the candidate should be selected for training strictly in accordance with their seniority. Both the learned counsel submitted that the pass marks of outdoor and indoor tests would be 50% i.e. 80 marks as can be seen from the Police Order -itself; insisting upon securing minimum pass marks in each item in out-door and indoor tests was not at all mandatory.