CH.NAYAK Vs. ORISSA ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD learned counsel for the petitioners, Mr. R. K. Rath and learned Standing Counsel for the School and Mass Education for opposite parties 2 to 5.

(2.) THE petitioners, who belong to socially educationally backward classes (under S.E.B.C. category) got their names registered in the Employment Exchange, Rayagada as they were having matriculation qualification with Teachers training course. Some posts of Primary School Teachers were created in Rayagada Education District and the Employment Officer, Employment Exchange, Rayagada was asked to sponsor the names of qualified persons to fill up the said posts. The Employment Officer sponsored the names of so many candidates including the petitioners. Thereafter, the District Inspector of Schools, Rayagada sent application forms to the candidates, but the same were not received by the petitioners. Interview for the selection was held on 9.4.1998. When the petitioners got knowledge about the same,they immediately approached and appeared before the Selection Committee, but due to agitation of the local people they were prevented from participating in the interview. Some other persons who could not get the application form whose names were sponsored by the Employment Exchange also tried to participate in the interview, but the local people prevented them, as a result of which they had filed writ petition before this Court, which was registered as O.J.C. No.14204 of 1998. The relevant portion of the said order is quoted herein below.

(3.) IT may be noticed here that this writ petition was disposed of on 20.2.2001, but a review petition was filed on behalf of opposite parties 2 to 5 to review that order on the ground that the opposite parties were not given any chance to defend and the order has been passed. In such circumstances, the review petition (Civil Review No.63 of 2002) was allowed vide order dated 7.1.2005 recalling the orders passed in the writ petition as well as Misc. Cases on the ground that the order was passed without notice to the opposite parties in the writ petition. However, we found that there was already a counter affidavit available on record, which was filed much before the final decision of the case. However, the same is being discussed below.