ASIS RANJAN CHAINI Vs. STATE OF ORISSA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioner seeks to challenge the Advertisement issued by the Orissa Public Service Commission inviting applications in the prescribed form for admission to the competitive examination for direct recruitment to the Orissa Judicial Service, Class II. The said Advertisement was issued in accordance with Rule 5 of the Orissa Judical Service Rules, 1994 bearing Advertisement No. 10 of 2003 -2004, vide Annexure -3, solely on the ground that the upper age limit stipulated in the said Advertisement is contrary to the decisions of this Court and causes hardship to the petitioner and many others similarly situated. According to the petitioner, no Advertisement was made for recruitment to Orissa Judical Service, Class II for the years 2000 -2001, 2001 -2002 and 2002 -2003 causing hardship to many candidates who intended to appear in such recruitment examination. Challenging the said inaction of the State Government, a Writ petition in the nature of public interest litigation was filed before this Court, which was registered as 2003 (II) OLR 586, W.P. (C) No. 4613 of 2003. The said Writ Petition was disposed of on 29.10.2003 observing as follows :

(2.) IT is pertinent to mention that Rule 10 of the Orissa Judicial Service Rules, 1994 stipulates that in order to be eligible for recruitment to the Orissa Judicial Service Rules, Class II, a candidate shall not be less than 21 years of age practice at the Bar for at least three years. But then the Supreme Court in the case of All India Judges' Association and Ors. v. Union of India and Ors., (2002) 4 SCC 247, held that in the light of the experience gained, the need for an applicant to be an Advocate at least for three years should be done away with. In consonance with the observations made by the Apex Court as well as by this Court in the aforesaid *W.P. (C) No. 4613/03, an order was issued by the Law Department of the Government of Orissa on 5th of November, 2003 stipulating that Government were satisfied that there was acute shortage of officers in the cadre of Orissa Judicial Service, Class II as no recruitment had been made during the last two years to fill up the vacancies and that Government in consultation with the High Court of Orissa were satisfied that it was necessary and expedient to relax some of the provisions contained in Rules 10 and 12 of the Orissa Judicial Service, Class II Rules, 1994 and therefore in exercise of the powers conferred by Rule 30 of the said Rules, the State Government relaxed the provisions of Clauses (a) and (b) of Sub -rule (1) of Rule 10, Sub -clause (d) of Clause (ii) of the Sub -rule (2) of Rule 10 and Clause (v) of Sub -rule (3) of Rule 12 of the Rules for the ensuing recruitment to the Orissa Judicial Service, Class II and further stipulated as follows :

(3.) THE main contention of Mr. Palit, learned counsel for the petitioner, is that in view of the observations made by this Court in the aforesaid Writ Petition, the State Government should have relaxed the upper age limit by three years by making the same 35 and not 34.