SUDHIR BARIK Vs. STATE OF ORISSA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner has, by way of this writ petition, sought to quash appointment of opposite party no.4 as Gram Rojgar Sevak (GRS) and issue direction to opposite parties no.1 to 3 to appoint him as GRS of Tulasipur Gram Panchayat as per the merit list in Annexure-7.

(2.) The factual matrix of the case, in hand, is that the petitioner, after passing HSC examination in the year 1996, took admission in +2 Science and passed in the year 1998 having secured 494 marks. On 30.12.2007, the Government of Orissa in Panchayatiraj Department published an advertisement in Annexure-3 inviting applications from desirous candidates for appointment to the post of Grama Rozgar Sevak (GRS) with remuneration of Rs.2000/- per month under the National Employment Guarantee (NREG) Act and NREG Scheme. Subsequently, a revised notification/guidelines was issued for appointment of GRS on 23.04.2008 in Annexure-4, which was obtained by the petitioner from the office of the DRDA, Puri under RTI Act. Pursuant to advertisement in Annexure-3, the petitioner submitted his application for engagement as GRS in respect of Tulasipur Gram Panchayat. Since no information was received about the result of the selection, the petitioner time and again enquired from the office of the DRDA, Puri and finally learnt that opposite party no.3 has engaged a less meritorious candidate as GRS under Tulasipur G.P. Thereafter, the petitioner received information under the RTI Act that his position was at serial no.2 and that the candidate at serial no.1 has forgone his engagement as GRS. Thus, he being the next candidate in the merit list deserves to be appointed as GRS in Tulasipur G.P. When the petitioner is waiting for his engagement, he came to know that opposite party no.4., who was at serial no.8 in the merit list, has been engaged as GRS in Tulasipur G.P. by opposite party no.3. Hence, this application.

(3.) Mr. B. Mishra, learned counsel for the petitioner contended that pursuant to advertisement in Annexure-3, the petitioner submitted his application for engagement as GRS, so far it relates to Puri district, under National Rural Employment Guarantee (NREG) Act and NREG Scheme. Thereafter, a merit list was prepared by the authority, and as such though the petitioner secured higher percentage marks he has not been given engagement, but the person securing less percentage of marks than the petitioner, namely, opposite party no.4, whose name finds place at serial no.8 in the merit list, has been engaged as GRS by the authority. It is further contended that though the petitioner satisfied all the requirements, as per the advertisement issued by the authority, along with the qualification of computer application, he was not selected. Therefore, the petitioner has approached this Court by filing the present application and sought for interference of this Court.