LAWS(ORI)-2000-10-8

PRADEEP KUMAR NAYAK Vs. STATE OF ORISSA

Decided On October 25, 2000
Pradeep Kumar Nayak Appellant
V/S
STATE OF ORISSA Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) IN both the aforesaid writ applications order of the Orissa State Administrative Tribunal, Cuttack Bench, Cuttack is under challenge. O.J.C. No. 13016 of 1999 is at the instance of some of the selected candidates for the post of Constable who got themselves impleaded as opp. parties before the Tribunal, O.J.C. No. 13349 of 1999 is by some of the selected candidates who were not parties before the Tribunal, but they have been aggrieved by the order of the Tribunal annulling the selection.

(2.) THE brief facts of the case is that the petitioners along with opp. party No. 7 applied for the selection to the post of Constable in the district of Malkanagiri pursuant to an advertisement for that post by the Superintendent of Police, Malkanagiri. Opp. party No. 7 along with other candidates appeared in the physical test, but on measurement of height, weight and chest he was found lacking in minimum prescribed physical standard and, therefore, was disqualified from taking part in any further test. The petitioners having confirmed to the standard, were allowed to take physical, written and viva voce test and being successful, were empanelled in the select list. Opp. party No. 7 challenged the selection inter alia on the ground that the constitution of the Selection Board was illegal, the Superintendent of Police, Nowrangur having been substituted in place of the Superintendent of Police, Malkanagiri by the Director General of Police and the Inspector General of Police and he was illegally disqualified on wrong measurement of his chest and on several other grounds.

(3.) LEARNED counsel for the petitioners assailed the impugned order mainly on the ground that the learned Tribunal has committed an error of record and gross illegality in finding that the Director General and the Inspector General of Police did not satisfy himself about the reasons for the absence of the Superintendent of Police, Malkanagiri and record the reason for substitution of the Superintendent of Police, Nowrangpur for Superintendent of Police, Malkanagiri as a member of the Selection Board and hence, the constitution of the Selection Board was vitiated and that the Tribunal ought to have held that opp. party No. 7 who was an applicant before the Tribunal in the Original Application having participated in the process of selection, he having been found disqualified, could not have turned round and challenge the constitution of the Selection Board itself.