Disposed

Ritesh Ranjan Rout v. State of Odisha

Orissa HC6 Mar 2024WP(C)/813/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Court permitted the investigating officer to continue the inquiry into a question paper leak scam affecting OSSC candidates. The Court directed the recruitment process to proceed contingent on the petitioners' non-involvement in the primary leakage charge and granted directions to publish results if they are cleared.

What did the court decide?

Permitted investigation to continue; directed OSSC to finalize proceedings and publish results if petitioners are found not involved in leaking, allowing their appointment despite criminal case penden

Ritesh Ranjan Rout Vs State of Odisha — Service and Employment | Orissa HC (2024)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK W.P.(C) No.28269 of 2023

¶2

Jyotiranjan Pradhan …. Petitioner Mr. D.K. Mohapatra, Advocate -versus…. State of Odisha & another Opposite Parties Mr. D. Nayak, A.G.A. Mr. S. Swain, Advocate for O.P.-2 W.P.(C) No.37128 of 2023 Rajat Kumar Pradhan …. Petitioner Mr. D.K. Mohapatra, Advocate -versus…. State of Odisha & another Opposite Parties Mr. D. Nayak, A.G.A. Mr. S. Swain, Advocate for O.P.-2 W.P.(C) No.37129 of 2023 Jagadish Rana …. Petitioner Mr. D.K. Mohapatra, Advocate -versus…. State of Odisha & another Opposite Parties Mr. D. Nayak, A.G.A. Mr. S. Swain, Advocate for O.P.-2 W.P.(C) No.37131 of 2023 Toran Singh Majhi …. Petitioner Mr. D.K. Mohapatra, Advocate -versus…. State of Odisha & another Opposite Parties Mr. D. Nayak, A.G.A. Mr. S. Swain, Advocate for O.P.-2 W.P.(C) No.37133 of 2023 Bharat Bhusan Nayak …. Petitioner Mr. D.K. Mohapatra, Advocate -versus…. State of Odisha & another Opposite Parties Mr. D. Nayak, A.G.A. Mr. S. Swain, Advocate for O.P.-2

¶3

// 2 //

¶4

W.P.(C) No.41576 of 2023

¶5

Charusmita Parida …. Petitioner Mr. D.K. Mohapatra, Advocate

¶6

-versus-

¶7

State of Odisha & another

¶8

…. Opposite Parties Mr. D. Nayak, A.G.A. Mr. S. Swain, Advocate for O.P.-2

¶9

W.P.(C) No.813 of 2024

¶10

Ritesh Ranjan Rout …. Petitioner Mr. D.K. Mohapatra, Advocate

-versus-

Order No.

08.

….
State of Odisha & another Opposite Parties
Mr. D. Nayak, A.G.A.
Mr. S. Swain, Advocate for O.P.-2
CORAM:
JUSTICE A.K. MOHAPATRA
ORDER
06.03.2024
1. This matter is taken up through Hybrid Arrangement (Virtual
/Physical Mode).
2. Heard learned counsel for the Petitioners in the connected batch
of writ applications as well as Mr. S. Swain, learned counsel appearing
for the OSSC.

¶15

Pursuant to the order passed by this court Mr. Bikash Ranjan Behera, Additional S.P., CID, C.B., who is the Investigating Officer in the question paper leak case, appeared before this Court on 15.02.2024. After hearing the learned counsels appearing for the parties as well as the I.O., this Court, considering the career and future of the students entwined the question paper leak racket, directed the Petitioners to appear before the I.O. on 19.02.2024 and the I.O. was further directed to record their statements and to file an affidavit before this Court. After examining the roles played by the present petitioners in the alleged question paper leak scam. Consequently, the matter was again listed on

¶16

// 3 //

¶17

28.02.2024 and the I.O. was present in person and filed an affidavit pursuant to order dated 15.02.2024.

¶18

On perusal of the affidavit filed by the I.O. it appears that the Petitioners appeared before the I.O. on 19.02.2024 for recording of their statement under Section 161 Cr.P.C. The said affidavit further reveals that the following Petitioners, namely 1-Jagadish Rana, 2-Rajat Kumar Pradhan, 3-Bharat Bhushan Nayak, 4-Charusmita Panda @ Parida, appeared before the I.O. and their statements were recorded under Section 161 Cr.P.C. The I.O. has further stated in his affidavit that the Petitioners who appeared before him had qualified for the main written examination of Junior Engineer (Civil) conducted by the OSSC which was held on 16.07.2023.

¶19

Further, referring to the statement of the Petitioners recorded under 161 Cr.P.C., the I.O. in his affidavit has stated that a couple of days before the scheduled examination, the Petitioners received phone calls from accused persons to receive question papers by paying a sum of Rs.15 to 18 lakhs. The Petitioners being desperate to qualify for the job came to Talasari, Balasore near Digha on 15.07.2023 evening by arranging vehicles to collect the question paper from the accused persons. Upon reaching the designated spot as requested by the accused persons, the original certificates along with blank cheques and mobile phones of the Petitioners were collected and kept by the accused persons. However, the accused persons were caught red handed by the local Police at the spot. The Petitioners who are present at the spot were allowed to go and appear in the examination which was scheduled to take place on the very next day.

¶20

On inquiry, the I.O. has come to a conclusion that the Petitioners, who were candidates of Junior Engineer (Civil) examination, were allured by the accused persons to receive the leaked question papers. He further stated that the Petitioners out of their desperation had gone to

¶21

// 4 //

¶22

Talasari, Balasore to receive the leaked question papers from the accused persons. However, a close scrutiny of the affidavit filed by the I.O. does not reveal any specific role played by any of the present Petitioners so far the leakage of the question papers is concerned. Nevertheless the I.O. has stated that the investigation is continuing, and more materials have been collected against the accused persons.

¶23

The aforesaid affidavit filed by the I.O., gives a prima facie inference that the occurrence took place in two parts. Firstly, the question papers were leaked. Secondly, the leaked question papers were sold to the aspiring candidates. The Petitioners, who were the aspiring candidates in this case, were desperate to get the job and were allured by the accused persons. Accordingly, they went to the spot as directed by the accused persons. While they were meeting with the accused persons, the Petitioners as well as the accused persons were apprehended from the spot red-handed by the police. Although the Petitioners were successfully apprehended at the spot, the Police let the Petitioners go thereby giving them an opportunity to appear in the examination which was scheduled to take place on the next day.

¶24

It is also a fact that the examination, which was conducted on 16.07.2023, was subsequently cancelled on the basis of the allegations of leakage of question papers of said examination. Pursuant to the order by this Court, the Petitioners were allowed to participate in the examination which was conducted again on 03.09.2023. 9. On a careful examination of the affidavit filed by the I.O., this Court is of the prima facie view that the Petitioners were party to the second part of occurrence. Therefore, it is also observed that they were not parties to the leakage of question paper which is the main allegation in the present writ applications. Moreover, the possibility of victimization of the Petitioners who were allured by the accused persons, with a prospect of receiving the leaked question papers in

¶25

// 5 //

¶26

exchange of some amount of money cannot be ruled out.

¶27

In the aforesaid factual backdrop, this Court permits the I.O. to continue with the investigation with a direction to conclude the same as expeditiously as possible by covering all angles of conspiracies. Further, this Court also directs the OSSC to finalize the proceeding initiated by issuing show cause notice to the Petitioners to which the Petitioners have already filed their reply. In the event, it is found that the Petitioners are in no way involved in the leakage of the question papers, then such proceeding be dropped and the results of the examination which was held on 03.09.2023 in respect of the present petitioners be published within a six weeks from the date of communication of a copy of this order. Furthermore, in the event it is found that the Petitioners have come out successfully in the written examination and the proceeding against them are dropped as directed hereinabove, then the OSSC shall proceed in their matter for publication of their final result by taking the necessary and consequential steps to conclude the recruitment process in respect of those Petitioners. Consequently, if it is found that the Petitioners are finally selected, then the pendency of the criminal case shall not stand in the way of the Petitioners being considered for appointment to the post of Junior Engineer (Civil).

¶28

In view of the aforesaid directions and observations W.P.(C) No.37128 of 2023-(Rajat Kumar Pradhan), W.P.(C) No.37129 of 2023(Jagadish Rana), W.P.(C) No.37131 of 2023-(Toran Singh Majhi), W.P.(C) No.37133 of 2023-(Bharat Bhusan Nayak), W.P.(C) No.41576 of 2023-(Charusmita Parida), W.P.(C) No.813 of 2024-(Ritesh Ranjan Rout) are accordingly disposed of.

¶29

With regard to W.P.(C) No.28269 of 2023, although the learned counsel for the Petitioner in this case filed an application for withdrawal of the writ application, however, the same was not allowed as this Court

¶30

// 6 //

¶31

was monitoring the entire investigation in the said writ application. In view of the affidavit filed by the I.O. pursuant to the order passed by this Court, the said writ application is also hereby disposed of as withdrawn. However, it is directed that the investigation which is being carried out by the I.O., shall be supervised by a Senior Police Officer not below the Rank of D.I.G. of Police as directed by this Court earlier vide order dated 31.08.2023.

¶32

With the aforesaid observations/ directions W.P.(C) No.28269 of 2023 stands disposed of.

¶33

Anil

¶34

( A.K. Mohapatra )
Judge

¶35

Signature Not Verified

¶36

Digitally Signed Signed by: ANIL KUMAR SAHOO Designation: Junior Stenographer Reason: Authentication Location: High Court of Orissa Date: 10-Jul-2025 19:21:22

Ritesh Ranjan Rout v. State of Odisha

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ritesh Ranjan Rout 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

Manoj Kumar Nayak Vs State of Odisha

Debiprasad Kar Vs State of Odisha

Som Mohapatra Vs State of Odisha

Pranab Kumar Das Vs State of Odisha

Mitu Dalei Vs State of Odisha

Sachidananda Rout Vs State of Odisha