ANWAR JAMIL Vs. STATE OF ODISHA & ANOTHER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Petitioner, in this writ petition, seeks to challenge the order dated 07.07.2011 (Annexure-5) passed by learned Orissa Administrative Tribunal, Cuttack Bench, Cuttack (for short, 'learned Tribunal) in O.A. No.849 (C) of 2009 dismissing the Original Application.

(2.) Grievance of the petitioner in O.A. No.849 (C) of 2009 was that pursuant to a recruitment test held on 21.08.1984 for the post of Junior Assistant in the Office of the Director General of Police Orissa, (DGPO) , the petitioner was duly selected and was appointed as Junior Assistant on 29.09.1984 on ad hoc basis. While continuing as such, another recruitment test was conducted to fill up 56 posts of Junior Assistant on regular basis on 25.06.1985. The petitioner although qualified in the written test, but was not called to appear in the viva voce conducted in November, 1986. Consequently, the petitioner along with 26 other Junior Assistants, who were continuing on ad hoc basis, were discharged from service with effect from 06.11986 pursuant to order dated 03.11986. Being aggrieved, the petitioner along with 26 others challenged their termination before learned Tribunal in O.A. Nos. 246 of 1986 and 96 of 1987 praying inter alia to quash the termination order. The said Original Applications were disposed of vide order dated 25.08.1987 with a direction that the petitioner along with 26 others be allowed to continue as such till the posts are filled up through regular recruitment test to be held in conformity with the procedure/instructions governing the field. The said order of learned Tribunal was challenged by the State of Odisha before the Hon'ble Supreme Court and the SLP was dismissed vide order dated 19.01.1988 and the order of learned Tribunal was confirmed. Subsequent to order dated 19.01.1988 passed by Hon'ble Supreme Court, the petitioner was reinstated in service and was allowed to continue purely on ad hoc basis vide order dated 11.01988. It is apt to note here that earlier recruitment to the post of Junior Assistant in Ministerial Cadre of the Police Head Quarters and in other Departments of Government of Odisha was governed by 'The Orissa Ministerial Service (Method of Recruitment) of Junior Assistant in Office of the Heads of Departments Rules, 1975'. In the year 1980, the D.G. of Police requested the Government to exempt his office from application of the said Rules. Thus, the State Government directed the DGPO to submit draft Rules for consideration and in the interregnum, some appointments like the petitioner was made during 1981-1988. Subsequently, Orissa Ministerial Officers of the Office of the Director-General and Inspector-General of Police and Certain other Offices (Method of Recruitment and Conditions of Service) Rules, 1988 (for short, 'the Rules, 1988') came into force. Recruitment test was held in the year 1988 for 100 posts of Junior Assistant, in terms of the Rules, 1988. Out of 100 posts, 33 were anticipated vacancies in the post of Junior Assistant. After the recruitment test, the petitioner along with 65 others had to face termination vide order dated 16.08.1988. Out of them, 12 employees challenged their termination in O.A. No. 1179 of 1988, whereas Anwar Jamil and others challenged the same in O.A. No.206 of 1989. When O.A.No.206 of 1989 was pending, O.A.No.1179 of 1988 was disposed of vide order dated 210.1990 quashing the termination order and treating the applicants therein (12 in numbers) deemed to be continuing in service from their initial date of appointment, i.e., 20.11986 without any break. Similar other Original Applications were also disposed of along with the same. The State-opposite parties assailed those orders in different Special Leave Petitions, which were dismissed on the ground of delay. After dismissal of the Special Leave Petitions, the applicants in O.A No.1179 of 1988 were issued with appointment orders on 27.11.1991. Subsequently, O.A. No.206 of 1989 was taken up for hearing. Although the applicants including the petitioner stood in a similar footing with applicants in O.A. No.1179 of 1988, learned Tribunal took a different view in Original Application bearing OA No.206 of 1989 and disposed of the same vide order dated 03.01.1997 (Annexure-5 to the OA) directing as under:-

(3.) Being not satisfied, one Ajay Kumar Bhuyan and others (respondent Nos.10, 11, 14, 15 and 24 in OA No.206 of 1989) filed a Review Petition bearing R.P. No.17 of 1997, which was dismissed vide order dated 01.01997. Being aggrieved, said Ajaya Kumar Bhuyan and others as well as the State-Opposite parties moved the Hon'ble Supreme Court against the orders passed in OA No.206 of 1989 as well as in Review Petition bearing RP No.17 of 1997, by filing separate Civil Appeals, which were dismissed vide order dated 012.2002 by Hon'ble Supreme Court. Hon'ble Supreme Court while dismissing the Civil Appeals also deprecated the earlier orders passed in OA No.1179 of 1988 and similar other Original Applications disposed of in terms of OA No.1179 of 1988. Due to non-compliance of the order passed in O.A. No.206 of 1989, Contempt Petition in C.P. No.49 (C) of 2003 was filed. In the contempt proceeding, State-opposite parties took a stand that pursuant to the direction in O.A. No. 206 of 1989, the authorities have verified the result of recruitment in between 1981 to 1988 and had implemented the order of learned Tribunal in its letter and spirit. On the basis of the submissions made by learned State Counsel, the contempt proceeding was dropped. Assailing the order passed in contempt proceeding, the petitioner preferred W.P.(C) No.8076 of 2005, which was dismissed vide order dated 18.04.2006.