STATE OF ODISHA Vs. SRI ASISH KUMAR MOHAPATRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This writ petition is under Art. 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India whereby and where under the order passed by the Odisha Administrative Tribunal, Cuttack Bench, Cuttack dated 02.12.2014 passed in O.A. No. 3424 (C) of 2013 has been assailed by the State of Orissa through its functionaries as the Tribunal while allowing the Original Application has directed the opposite parties, the petitioners herein to appoint him, if he is otherwise found suitable for appointment.

(2.) The brief fact of the case is that the opposite party, applicant has applied for the post of Fireman Driver under SEBC category in pursuance to the advertisement published in the Oriya Daily newspaper the Samaj dated 30.12012 for recruitment of 319 posts of Fireman Driver in Orissa Fire Service organization. He had appeared in the test and secured 37.5 marks which even though is less than the qualifying mark to be selected as Fireman Driver under SEBC category, but not selected while the other candidate who has also an applicant under the SEBC category even though has secured 37 marks has been selected and engaged, he having no option has approached to the Tribunal for redressal of his grievance, the Tribunal has passed the order with a direction to appoint him, if he is found to be otherwise eligible. The State of Orissa and its functionaries being aggrieved with the said order is before this court by way of the instant writ petition assailing the said order on the ground that the Tribunal has erred in passing the order by directing to appoint the applicant under the unreserved category without considering the fact that he is not fit to be considered under the unreserved category candidates since he is over aged being at the age of 29 years while as per the condition of advertisement, candidature of the candidate to be considered under the unreserved category has been mentioned as per which the age should not be more than 25 years. But without appreciating this aspect of the matter, the Tribunal only on taking into consideration the marks which is higher than the other candidate belonging to SEBC category has directed the authorities to appoint him. But while doing so, the Tribunal fails to consider that other candidate who has got engagement under SEBC category has got his engagement under the unreserved category candidate being at par with the candidates belonging to unreserved category and he was found to be eligible in all respect to be considered under the unreserved category.

(3.) Learned counsel representing the opposite party/applicant while opposing the submission of the learned counsel representing the petitioners, state of Orissa, has submitted that the Tribunal has not erred in passing the order, rather the Tribunal has passed the order taking into consideration the fact that the other candidate who also belongs to SEBC category and even though he has got lesser marks than him, directed the authorities to engage him under the unreserved category, as such there is no error in the said order. Hence submission has been made to dismiss the writ petition.