Rajkishore Barik Vs State of Odisha

In the present intra-Court appeal, the appellant has questioned the illegality of an order dated 21.02.2024 passed by a learned Single Judge of this Court whereby the writ petition i.e. W.P.(C) No.18225 of 2023 filed by the appellants has been dismissed. The appellants were petitioners No.4 and 5 in the said writ petition.

¶17

The controversy related to recruitment for the post of Live Stock Inspector pursuant to an advertisement issued by the District Chief Veterinary Officer, Jagatsinghpur district. The appellants were shortlisted after following the recruitment process. Apparently, based on certain allegations made by the participants in the selection process, the certificates obtained by the appellants were scrutinized by the authorities. The same were found to have been fraudulently obtained.

¶18

Page 1 of 3

¶19

The learned Single Judge, after having examined the pleadings/ counter pleadings on record, concluded in paragraphs 8.1 and 8.2 as under:

¶20

“8.1. As found from the record and as admitted by the Petitioners, all the Petitioners after passing their High School Certificate Examination, prosecuted their +2 Arts course under the Council and passed the said examination successfully in the year 1996, 2000 and 2004 respectively vide Annexure-1 series, 2 series & 3 series. As found from the record, Petitioner Nos. 2 & 3 by taking a false plea that they have lost their SLC certificate because of white ant, moved the concerned school authority vide Annexure-A/14 for issuance of duplicate SLCs. After obtaining such duplicate SLCs, they got themselves admitted to prosecute +2 vocational course and passed the same in the year 2013 and 2011 respectively. Since by taking a false stand before the school authority vide Annexure-A/14, Petitioner Nos. 2 & 3 obtained duplicate SLCs and prosecuted their +2 vocational stream under the Council to which they are otherwise not eligible in view of the provisions contained under Regulation 123, benefit of such qualification is not to be extended. Not only that in view of the clear provision contained under Regulation 123, a candidate is only eligible to get himself admitted to prosecute +2 vocational course after passing his High School Certificate Examination.

¶21

8.2. Since Petitioners after passing their HSC Examination prosecuted +2 Arts course and passed the same under the Council, as per the considered view of this Court, qualification of +2 vocational course so acquired by the Petitioners in the year 2013 and 2011 respectively vide Annexure-1 to 3 series, cannot be used by them to get the benefit of appointment as Live Stock Inspector as eligible Gomitra candidate. Petitioner Nos. 2 & 3 to get themselves admitted to prosecute +2 vocational stream, have committed fraud on the School as well as on the Council. Placing reliance on the decisions of the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of S .P. Chengalvaraya Naidu & Indian Oil

¶22

Page 2 of 3

¶23

Corporation Ltd. as well as the provisions contained under Regulation 123, this Court is of the view that Petitioners are not eligible and entitled to get any relief as fraud vitiates everything. This Court accordingly dismiss both the writ petitions and vacate the interim order dt.21.06.2023. While vacating the interim order, this Court directs Opp. Party Nos. 3 & 4 to comply with the direction issued by this Court on 26.06.2023 in W.P.C.(OA) No.1587 of 2016 within a period of two (2) weeks from the date of receipt of this order.”

¶24

Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the appellants has not disputed the findings of fact recorded by the learned Single Judge as noted above. He has, however, submitted that the appellants did not remember as to whether they had physically obtained the certificates from the Council of Higher Secondary Education of having passed +2 vocational certificates or the same had been destroyed by white ants. He has submitted that the second course certificate in such circumstance ought not to have been rejected.

¶25

There being no dispute about the fact as concluded by the learned Single Judge that the appellants had obtained duplicate higher secondary course certificate fraudulently, we don’t find any reason to interfere with the impugned judgment of the learned Single Judge.

¶26

The appeal stands dismissed being devoid of merit.

¶27

(Chakradhari Sharan Singh)

¶28

Chief Justice

¶29

Signature Not Verified

¶30

(M.S. Raman)

¶31

Digitally Signed Signed by: SANJAY KUMAR JENA Designation: SECRETARY Judge Reason: Authentication SK Jena/Secy. Location: High Court of Orissa, Cuttack. Date: 25-Apr-2024 14:35:56

¶32

Page 3 of 3

Rajkishore Barik v. State of Odisha

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Rajkishore Barik v. State of Odisha

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Vikash B.Sc Nursing College, Balasore Vs State of Odisha

Bikash Swain Vs Krushna Chandra Khatua

Pratima Pradhan Vs Susanta Kumar Das, Director, Secondary Education, Bbsr

State of Odisha Vs Shakti Prasad Dehuri

Sadananda Nayak Vs the State Information Commissioner, Bbsr

State of Odisha Vs Gopinath Swain