SMITARANI SAHOO Vs. STATE OF ORISSA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) SINCE both the petitions involve common question of law, they were heard together.

(2.) PETITIONERS have challenged the selection procedure followed by the respondents in preparing merit list of eligible candidates who were found suitable for appointment as Sikshya Sahayaks.

(3.) IT is pertinent that the Department did consider the marks obtained by the petitioners in the vocational course at the time of preparation of provisional list. Since petitioners found their name in the provisional list, there was no reason for them to apprehend that their vocational course marks would not be considered by the Department while preparing the final select list. Before preparation of the final list, Department did not inform the petitioners that in view of the letter dated 14.2.2011, their marks obtained in the vocational course would not be taken into consideration while preparing the select list. Undisputedly, this letter was issued after the applications were submitted by the candidates including the petitioners as the last date of receipt of the application was 10.2.2011. Preliminary scrutiny and compilation of the applications were to be completed by 15.2.2011. Obviously at the time when provisional list was prepared, the Collector was not aware of the letter dated 14.2.2011. Surprisingly, though the Academic Committee of the Council had taken a decision on 11.1.2010 which was duly approved by the General Body of the Council in its meeting held on 13.1.2010 laying down the criteria to be followed for deciding equivalence to different streams of Higher Secondary Examinations, it was not communicated to the Special Secretary to Government, Department of Higher Education, Orissa, Bhubaneswar and furthr Collector-cum-CEO, Zilla Parishad for compliance till after the preliminary scrutiny and compilation of applications Education District Unit wise were completed.