Disposed

Basanti Nayak v. State of Odisha

Orissa HC10 Aug 2015WP(C)/14473/2015

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This bench allowed a petition where a petitioner from the SEBC category, aged 44 and outside the prescribed limit, sought re-consideration for Sikhya Sahayak engagement based on a previous order granting age relaxation. The court, noting the respondent's absence, directed the Director to verify application details and consider the petitioner if eligible, disposing of the writ petition.

What did the court decide?

Liberty to approach the Director of Elementary Education to verify application details; petitioner to be considered for Sikhya Sahayak engagement if eligible and application prior to cut-off.

The petitioner has submitted that if the case would not be taken up, the proce ss of engagement for consideration of Sikhya Sahayak would be concluded in that way, the petit ioner will suffer irreparable loss and injury which can not be compensated in terms of money a nd as such it has been prayed to pass an order directing the opposite party to consider the ca se for engagement as Sikhya Sahayak by giving benefit of relaxation of age in terms of the ord er passed by this Court in W.P.(C) No. 7465 of 2015 based upon the decision of the committee. Considering the nature of relief sought for, this writ petition is being dispo

The petitioner who is an aspirant for consideration for Sikhya Sahayak, belong s to SEBC category having the age 44 years but as per the over age prescribe i.e. 42 years, th e case of the petitioner is not being considered hence the petitioner has come to this Court f or issuance of direction for re-consideration of her candidature as Sikhya Sahayak on the grou nd that this Court in W.P.(C) No. 18542 of 2014. On the basis of the decision taken by

the high power committee constituted by the opposite party-authorities who vide Order No.20199 dated 24.08.2013 resolve that the department will have no objection if the candidate beyond the upper age limit up to 42 years for general candidate for five years age relaxation for SC/ST/OBC/SEBC/Women/ Ex-Serviceman has passed the following orders:-

Keeping the mandate of RTE in view and taking the vacancies into consideation, the committee decided that the Deptt. Will have no objection if the candidates beyond the upp er age limit, i.e. up to 42 years for general candidates with 5 years age relaxation for SC/ST /OBC/ SEBC/ Women/Ex-Serviceman and 10 years age relaxation as per Order No.20199 dated 24.08. 2013 of S & M.E. Deptt. Are allowed by Honble High Court for consideration for their engagemen t as per merit only who are otherwise eligible. But this will be on time and only based on Cou rt order. It can not be considered as precedent.

On the basis of the order passed by this Court in W.P.(C) No. 18542 of 2014 th e Bench of this Court in W.P.(C) No. 7465 of 2015 has disposed of this writ petition allowing the prayer of the writ petition of W.P.(C) No. 7465 of 2015 by granting relaxation in age. The case of the petitioner is that she has made online application on 14.09. 2014 but her candidature

has not been considered on the ground of having more than the upper age prescribed. It has been contended by the petitioner that when the authorities have taken d ecision to grant relaxation, hence rejection of the candidature of the petitioner on this grou nd is an arbitrary exercise.

It has further been contended that when the department through a high power co mmittee has taken decision expressing no objection if the upper age limit would be relaxed, ba sed upon said decision this Court has passed an order in W.P.(C) No. 18542 of 2014, hence requ irement of similar order from this Court in similar nature is nothing but only to harass the p etitioner.

This Court on 07.08.2015 in W.P.(C) Nos. 14426 of 2015 and 14429 of 2015 has p assed an order in this regard deprecated the actions of the authorities for asking similar nat ure of order with a further upon the Commissioner-cum-Secretary to Government, School & Mass E ducation Department to look into the matter.

Although none appears on behalf of the opposite party on the ground of abstain ing from Court work even though this writ petition requires to be disposed of considering the urgency of the matter on the basis of the material available on record giving liberty to the p etitioner to approach before the Director of Elementary Education School & Mass Education Depa rtment within a week from

On receipt of such representation the Director School & Mass Education would v erify the details of the petitioner from the records and if it is found that the petitioner ha s submitted her application form prior to cut off date she would be considered for engagement of Sikhya Sahayak if she is found to be otherwise eligible.

Basanti Nayak v. State of Odisha

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Basanti Nayak 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

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Debendra Nimala Vs State and Ors.

Anirudha Mandangi Vs State and Ors.

Jagabandhu Nanaka Vs State and Ors.

Suchitra Mallik Vs Collector,Kendrapara

Ugrasena Petia Vs State and Ors.

Rabindra Panda Vs State of Orissa