Disposed

Niranjan Swain v. State of Odisha

Orissa HC18 Aug 2015WP(C)/14438/2015

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This Court disposed of a writ petition challenging rejection of candidature for Sikshya Sahayak due to overage. The court granted liberty to the petitioner to file a fresh representation before the State Project Director, reserving merit for future adjudication.

What did the court decide?

Writ petition disposed of; liberty granted to petitioner to approach State Project Director by filing fresh representation with details including submission of application form within one week.

Niranjan Swain Vs State of Odisha — Labour and Industrial Disputes | Orissa HC (2015)

¶1

W.P.(C) No.14438 of 2015

¶2

06. 18.08.2015 Heard.
 It is a case where the candidature of the petitioner for consideration of Siks
hya Sahayak has been rejected on the ground for over age.

¶3

 It has been submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that similar i
ssue for consideration of Sikshya Sahayak has been decided by this Court in W.P.(C) No. 18542
of 2014 and other analogous cases which was disposed of on the basis of decision taken by the
high power committee of the Department who has expressed his no objection if there would be re
laxation in age and on the basis of such decision taken by the high power committee the writ p
etition being W.P.(C) No. 18542 of 2014 was disposed of by this Court directing the authority
to grant relaxation in age.

¶4

 Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner has submitted that the case of th
e petitioner is similar to the issue involved in W.P.(C) No. 18542 of 2014.

¶5

 He further submits that the petitioner being W.P.(C) Nos. 14426, 14429, 14473
and 14645 of 2015 and other cases, those writ petitions have been disposed of directing the wr
it petitioners to approach before the authority and if their online applications having been
submitted prior to 30.09.2014, their cases would be considered.

¶6

 Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner has also
submitted online application prior to 30.09.2014 and as such he has prayed for issuance of
 direction upon the opposite parties to consider his candidature for engagement of Si
kshya Sahayak.

¶7

 He further submits that the process has not yet been concluded.

¶8

 Learned counsel for the opposite party-State has fairly submitted that he has
not disputed the factual aspect.

¶9

 In view of such submission the writ petition is disposed of giving liberty to
the petitioner to approach before the State Project Director, Odisha Primary Education Program
me Authority (OPEPA), Bhubaneswar by filing a fresh representation giving therein all details
including the submission of application form within a week from the date of receipt of certifi
ed copy of this order.

¶10

 The concerned opposite party if finds that the online application form has bee
n submitted by the petitioner within that last date prescribed and if the selection process re
garding the candidature who have been deprived from consideration of their candidature on the
ground of having over age is still going on then the case of the petitioner shall be considere
d if he is found to be otherwise eligible.

¶11

 With such observation and direction, the writ petition is disposed of accordingly.
 It is made clear that this Court has not exercised its mind on the claim of the petition
er on its merit.

¶12

 Issue urgent certified copy.

¶13

 ... S.N. Prasad, J.

¶14

Sukanta

Niranjan Swain v. State of Odisha

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Niranjan Swain v. State of Odisha

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Sribachha Behera Vs State of Orissa

Siba Pr.Rath Vs State of Orissa

Sarat Ch.Biswal Vs State of Orissa

Premananda Pattjoshi Vs State of Orissa

Madan Behera Vs State of Odisha

Narottam Khuntia Vs State of Odisha