URMILA KAR Vs. STATE OF ODISHA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner in the present writ application questions the correctness of order dtd. 11/3/2022 passed by the Collector, Balasore in Misc. Case No. 113 of 2021, whereby the BDO, Simulia was directed to re-look into the selection process for engagement of Master Book Keeper (MBK) in Maitapur Gram Panchayat.

(2.) The facts of the case, briefly stated, are that by letter dtd. 13/7/2021, the B.D.O., Simulia notified the date and time of selection of M.B.K. (and other community resource persons) to the President/Secretary of Maitapur Gram Panchayat Level Federation (GPLF) with request to depute their screening committee members for the purpose. Several persons including the petitioner applied out of whom four persons, including the petitioner and Opposite Party No .6 were short listed. In the merit list published on 19/6/2021, the petitioner and Opposite Party No.6 were found to have secured the same marks but Opposite Party No.6 being senior in age, was selected. According to the petitioner, the selection was done in an illegal manner and the selection committee made several interpolations and tampered with the mark list to give extra marks to the selected candidate. The petitioner therefore, submitted a representation highlighting the irregularities in the selection process before the Collector, Balasore on 14/9/2021. Since no action was taken, she approached this Court in W.P.(C). No. 37752 of 2021, which was disposed of by order dtd. 3/12/2021 directing the Collector to consider the representation of the petitioner and dispose of the same by passing a reasoned order. The Collector, thereafter considered the representation and after taking note of the findings of the inquiry made by the District Project Manager and others, found that the selection process was vitiated by several irregularities. Moreover, the selection process was not conducted as per the guidelines. Under such circumstances, the Collector, by the order impugned, directed the BDO, Simulia to re-look into the selection process following Government guidelines.

(3.) According to the petitioner, it being found that the Opposite Party No.6 was illegally selected, the Collector ought to have directed her engagement, as she had secured the highest marks and also had higher qualification. On such facts, the petitioner has filed the writ application with the following prayer;