NIRAKAR SAHOO Vs. STATE OF ORISSA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) In this writ application the petitioners challenge the order dated 28.11.2011 (Annexure-16) passed by the learned Orissa Administrative Tribunal, Cuttack Bench, Cuttack in O.A. No. 605 (C) of 2010 with a further prayer to direct the opposite parties to consider the case of the petitioners for appointment in the establishment of Controller of Accounts, Orissa, Bhubaneswar (opposite party No. 2).

(2.) The brief facts of the case as asserted by the petitioners in this writ application may be stated as follows : The Office of the Controller of Accounts-opposite party No. 2 was established in the year 1991 by the State Government to deal with the pension and provident of employees of aided educational institutions and the Universities. In 2000 it was declared as one of the Heads of Departments. Opposite party No. 2 started computerization of GPF and pension accounts of the employees. The work was given to a private service provider, namely, M/s. Chancellor Infotech. The petitioner Nos. 1, 4 and 6 being selected by the service provider, were engaged as Data Entry Operators (DEOs) in the office of opposite party No. 2. With the increase of work load, some more DEOs were required to be engaged for which the service provider held an open competition in which the petitioners were duly selected and thereafter engaged as DEOs in the office of opposite party No. 2. On 05.09.2003, the State Government accorded permission for engagement 31 computer knowing Accountants on contractual basis on consolidated salary of Rs. 5,000/- per month through service provider-in the office of opposite party No. 2. Thereafter, opposite party No. 2 entered into an agreement with another service provider, namely, M/s. Trident Softech (P) Ltd., in which it was stipulated that the service provider would provide 31 DEOs with minimum qualification of Graduation with PGDCA or 'O' level computer qualification. The agreement remained in force for a period of three years. The suitability of the petitioners along with others was adjudged and they having been found suitable were allowed to continue as DEOs in the office of opposite party No. 2. The contractual service of the petitioners continued till 28.02.2008 and thereafter there was no extension of their service and as such they were rendered unemployed. Considering the plight of the petitioners, the State Government-opposite party No. 2 again sanctioned 20 temporary posts of DEOs in the office of opposite party No. 2 to be filled up on contractual basis on consolidated remuneration Rs. 4,000/- per month. Though a committee constituted under the Chairmanship of opposite party No. 2 selected 20 persons including the petitioners, no engagement to the selected persons was given. On the other hand, the State Government in the Finance Department under their letter No. 56347/F dated 21.11.2009 (Annexure-13) created 63 posts of Junior Assistants in the office of opposite party No. 2 in lieu of abolition of 63 posts of Senior Assistants, which were lying vacant and withdrawal of the temporary posts of DEOs. It was indicated in Annexure-13 that recruitment of candidates to the newly created posts of Junior Assistants was to be made through the Orissa Staff Selection Commission by following Orissa Ministerial Services (Method of Recruitment and Condition of Services of Assistants and Section Officers in Heads of Departments) Rules, 1994 (in short 'OMS Rules, 1994'). It was also indicated that preference may be given to the candidates having knowledge of computer literacy. In terms of letter under Annexure-13, opposite party No. 2 issued letter dated 28.01.2010 (Annexure-14) to the Orissa Staff Selection Commission (opposite party No. 3) to sponsor the names of 61 candidates for appointment as Junior Assistants in the office of opposite party No. 2. On receipt of the aforesaid indent from opposite party No. 2, the Staff Selection Commission (opposite party No. 3) published an advertisement in the Oriya daily, 'The Samaj' on 09.02.2010 inviting application for 218 posts of Junior Assistants for the office of several Heads of Departments including 61 posts for the office of opposite party No. 2. In the said advertisement, which is annexed as Annexure-15, admittedly no qualification of computer knowledge has been prescribed.

(3.) Challenging the advertisement under Annexure-15, the petitioners filed Original Application No. 605 (C) of 2010 before the Orissa Administrative Tribunal only on the ground that the advertisement was silent regarding the stipulation of the Government in Annexure-13 that in the matter of recruitment preference may be given to the candidates having knowledge of computer. On contest, the learned Orissa Administrative Tribunal dismissed the Original Application by its judgment dated 28.11.2011 (Annexure-16) holding that opposite party No. 3 is duty bound to proceed with the recruitment process in accordance with the rules and not according to instruction of the Finance Department and that since the Rules of recruitment did not provide for giving preferential right to persons having knowledge in computer, the petitioners could not claim any preferential treatment.