BRAJA KISHORE SAHOO Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) School and Mass Education Department of the State Government issued a publication on 3.3.2006 in the local daily "The Samaj" inviting applications for the post of Siksha Sahayak (S.S.) in thirty Revenue Districts of the State. Petitioner filed his application along with relevant documents on 26.10.2006 in response to the said advertisement. In the provisional list published in the year 2006, the name of the petitioner found place at serial number 30. He was provisionally selected for engagement as S.S. against ST-Dereservation and carry forward vacancy from 2006 merit list as per the Government order No. 13590/SME dated 3.7.2008 and 13859/SME dated 8.7.2008. Consequently, he was issued a letter dated 24.7.2008 for verification of certificates and other documents. To the surprise of the petitioner, he found fresh merit list dated 3.7.2008 and 8.7.2008 published on 31.7.2008 by the Department for appointment of S.S. from 2006 merit list to be engaged as ST-Dereservation and carry forward vacancy. In the said list, the name of the petitioner was missing though he had secured the highest percentage of marks out of the selected candidates published in the said list. On enquiry, petitioner came to know that he was not selected because his certificate i.e. Diploma for Secondary School Teachers of the Visually Handicapped was not considered as equivalent to the desired Certified Teachers Course (C.T.).

(2.) Aggrieved by the action of the Department, petitioner filed two representations; one addressed to the Collector and CEO Zilla Parisad, Nayagarh dated 5.8.2008 and another dated 7.8.2008 to the Sub-Collector, Nayagarh, airing his grievance to consider his case in the light of various decisions of the Government of Orissa C.D. and R.R. Department, the Women and Child Development Department and Director of Teacher Education and SCERT, Orissa acknowledging Diploma Certificate obtained from any National Institute established or recognized by the Government of India as equivalent to C.T.

(3.) Since no decision was taken by the concerned authorities on his representations, petitioner filed writ petition (C) No.12524 of 2008. The said petition was disposed of giving liberty to the petitioner to file representation before the Collector, Nayagarh, to be considered by the Collector, Nayagarh as expeditiously as possible. Accordingly, petitioner filed his representation before the Collector and District Magistrate, Nayagarh. The said representation was rejected by the Collector on 12.11.2008 with the observations that Diploma for Secondary School Teachers of the Visually Handicapped submitted by the petitioner was not equivalent to the desired C.T. Hence this writ petition.