MINATI SAHOO Vs. STATE OF ODISHA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard learned counsel for the Petitioner as well as Mr.V.Mohapatra, learned counsel appearing for private Opposite Party Nos. 5 and 6 and Mr.P.C.Das, learned Additional Standing Counsel for the State-Opposite Parties. Perused the pleadings of the parties and documents annexed thereto.

(2.) The factual background of the Writ Petition leading to the filing of the present Writ Petition in a nutshell, is that the Petitioner belongs to SEBC category and she was duly selected in a valid recruitment process conducted for appointment to the post of Assistant Revenue Inspector (ARI) vide order dtd. 19/7/2012. Thereafter the Petitioner joined in service on 27/7/2012 in Odogaon Tahasil of Nayagarh district. While the Petitioner was continuing, she appeared in the departmental examination on 19/10/2016 and completed the ARI training successfully in the year 2020.

(3.) While the matter stood thus, in the year 2022 a gradation list of ARI of Nayagarh district was published on 1/12/2022. In the said gradation list the Petitioner was placed at Sl.No.4 whereas name of the the private Opposite party Nos. 5 and 6 have been shown at Sl.Nos.10 and 17 respectively of the said gradation list. Learned counsel for the Petitioner further contended that the next promotion from the post of ARI is to the post of R.I. and such promotion is to be governed under Rule 11 of the Orissa District Revenue Service (Method of Recruitment and Conditions of Service) Rules, 1983. By referring to Rules of the year 1983, learned counsel for the Petitioner submitted that the Petitioner satisfies all the eligibility criteria as required under the said Rules. As such the Petitioner is eligible to be promoted to the post of R.I along with other similarly placed eligible candidates.