KHAGENDRA KUMAR BEHERA Vs. COMMISSIONER OF ENDOWMENTS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Mr. Das, learned advocate appears on behalf of petitioner and submits, challenge raised by his client in the writ petition is appointment of opposite party no.5 as Executive Officer of Sri Radha Kishore Jew and other deities at Thakurmahal in Balasore. He draws attention to annexure-1 being advertisement dtd. 3/12/2019 for appointment of Executive Officer, issued by Endowment Inspector, Balasore inviting applications from eligible persons for being appointed. One of the eligibility criteria was that candidate should be between ages 30 to 60 years. He submits, his client, as on date of the advertisement, was older than 60 years of age and hence, did not apply though otherwise he felt, he is eligible.

(2.) Subsequently his client came to know that opposite party no.5 had been appointed as Executive Officer though he was over 60 years of age. Hence, his client is before Court. He relies on judgment of the Supreme Court in Ramana v. International Airport Authority of India (IAAI) reported in AIR 1979 SC 1628, paragraph-10.

(3.) Mr. Sharma, learned advocate, Additional Government Advocate appears on behalf of State.