SANGHAMITRA MOHANTY Vs. STATE OF ORISSA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioner in the present writ application filed under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India challenges the selection and appointment of opposite party No. 5 as Market Supervisor in the Municipal Corporation, Bhubaneswar, opposite party No. 3.

(2.) TO put shortly, the case of the petitioner is that in order to fill up newly created post of Market Supervisor in the Municipal Corporation, Bhubaneswar, the Executive Officer, opposite party No. 4 requested the District Employment Officer. Bhuabneswar vide letter Annexure -1 to sponsor the names of at least 20 candidates. It was indicated in the said letter that the candidates must be Bachelor of Arts having two years experience as Market Supervisor and if sufficient number of candidates having such experience are not available, then simple Graduates may be sponsored. The District Employment Officer however, submitted a list of 40 candidates including the names of the petitioner and opposite party No. 5 who are simple graduates having no requisite experience. Thereupon interview as conducted on 12.10.1993 at 11 a.m. in the Corporation Office. Bhubaneswar and in the said interview out of 40 sponsored candidates, only 11 appeared and finally a merit list was prepared, wherein opposite party No. 5 having secured 59 marks was placed in the first position, where as one Bijay Kumar Das having secured 57 marks was placed in the second position. So far as the petitioner is concerned, it is stated that she secured 53.7 marks. The grievance of the petitioner is that awarding of 5 marks to the opposite party No. 5 for his acquiring LL.B Degree and 10 marks towards experience as Market Supervisor is illegal and arbitrary. She asserts that opposite party No. 5 had no required experience as notified in Annexure -1. As it appears from Annexure -3 he has previous experience as an Investigator in Agricultural Finance Construction Ltd. and Industrial Management Consultants, Orissa, and as a clerk -cum -typist in another institution. These experiences, according to the petitioner, should not have been taken into consideration for awarding 10 more marks. So 15 marks awarded towards LL.B. Degree and experience, if deducted from the total marks, then his position would be below the petitioners. One Bijay Kumar Das who had secured 57 marks and had been placed in second position approached this Court in O.J.C. No. 3675 of 1994 challenging the selection of opposite party No. 5. It was only thereafter that the authorities revised the merit list, placed Sri Das in serial No. 1 and appointed him as Market Supervisor. Since he got the desired result, he did not persue the writ petition and consequently it was disposed of being not pressed. The petitioner did not challenge the manner of selection since no more post of Market Supervisor was available in the Municipal Corporation. Subsequently in the year 1995 another post was created by the Director, Urban Development, Government of Orissa -opposite party No. 2 as is evident from Annexure -6 and the said post was filled up by giving appointment to opposite party No. 5 on the basis of the earlier selection. Petitioner asserts that since she secured more market than opposite party No. 5 in the interview as aforesaid, in all fairness the authority should have considered her case and appointed her as Market Supervisor. In the circumstances, she has urged that the order of appointment of opposite party No. 5 as Market Supervisor should be quashed and the authorities should be directed to appoint her in the said post.

(3.) OPPOSITE party No. 5, the main contestant in the writ petition, in his counter affidavit contends inter alia, that the selection committee took into consideration his educational qualification, experience and performance in the viva voce and placed him in serial No. 1 and one Bijay Kumar Das in Serial No. 2. Subsequently, the list was revised in which Shri Das was placed in first position and he was placed in the second position and the post of Market Supervisor being one. Shri Das was appointed. Subsequently another post was created in the Municipal Corporation and he being the second in the revised merit list, the authorities appointed him against the said post. He contends that since no new selection committee was constituted, the action of the authorities in giving appointment to him from the previous selection list cannot be questioned.