SANJAY KUMAR DAS MOHAPATRA Vs. STATE OF ORISSA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This writ application is directed against an interim order dated 29.6.2011 passed by the Orissa Administrative Tribunal, Cuttack in O.A. No. 2069(C) of 2011.

(2.) The petitioner, who is the applicant before the Tribunal, has filed the Original Application challenging the order of promotion issued in favour of opposite parties 5 and 6 in super-session of claim of the petitioner that admittedly he is senior to the said opposite parties in the rank of Sub-Inspector of Police. It is the further case of the petitioner before the Tribunal that without finalization of gradation list of Inspectors, no order of promotion could be passed and the impugned order of promotion dated 27th June, 2011 contravenes the Constitutional mandate that under no circumstances reservation would exceed 50% of the total number of vacancies. An interim prayer was also made in the Original application for stay of notification dated 27th June, 2011 in which 57 Inspectors have been promoted to the post of Deputy Superintendent of Police in O.P.S. cadre on ad hoc basis for a period of one year or till recommendation of O.P.S.C. is received and accepted by the Government, whichever is earlier. After hearing the learned counsel appearing for the parties on the above interim prayer, the Tribunal in the impugned order clarified that reservation of more than 50% in a cadre for Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes and O.B.C. cannot be done and also directed that no promotion subsequent to promotion order dated 27th June, 2011 shall be ordered till filing of the counter and it's adjudication without leave of the Tribunal. The petitioner not being satisfied with the aforesaid interim order passed by the Tribunal has approached this Court in the present writ application.

(3.) Lengthy arguments were advanced by the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, learned Advocate General and learned counsel appearing for the private opposite parties on the law of reservation with reference to several decisions of the Hon'ble Supreme Court. A preliminary objection was raised by the learned counsel appearing for the private opposite parties with regard to maintainability of the Original Application: