Ramachandra Mundachhina Vs State of Odisha

Panchayat on adhoc basis. He applied for the post pursuant to the said advertisement but no selection process was held for which he approached this Court in W.P.(C) No.14142 of 2022. The said writ application was disposed of by order dated 24.06.2022 directing the Collector to consider the representation of the petitioner. Pursuant to such order, the Collector, Kalahandi by order dated 17.03.2023, disposed of the representation without granting any relief to the petitioner by directing the B.D.O., Lanjigarh to expedite the process of selection within a month. It is stated that no action was taken despite such order of the Collector for which the petitioner again approached this Court in W.P.(C) No.16134 of 2023. By order dated 18.05.2023, this Court disposed of the writ application granting liberty to the petitioner to move to the Collector regarding non-implementation of his earlier order and in such event, the Collector was to immediately take up the matter regarding compliance of his earlier order.

¶22

Page 2 of 6

¶23

Pursuant to such order, the petitioner submitted representation on 26.05.2023 to the Collector. While the representation was pending, fresh advertisement was issued on 07.07.2023 by the B.D.O., Lanjigarh for the post of Jogan Sahayak (Supply Assistant). Instead of challenging the said action of the B.D.O., the petitioner applied pursuant to the advertisement and participated in the selection process. In the final merit list the petitioner’s name did not find place. Being thus aggrieved, he has filed the present writ application with the following prayer:-

¶24

“Under the circumstances it is humbly prayed therefore that the Hon’ble Court may graciously be pleased to issue a writ in the nature of mandamus or any other appropriate writ/writs by quashing the select list which was recommended by the BDO Lanjigarh dated 02.07.2024 to Sub-Collector Bhawanipatna i.e. Opp. Party No.4, under Annexure-12;

¶25

And further be pleased to direct the opp. Party No.3 to consider the case of the petitioner for appointment as Jogan Sahayak in Malijubang Gram Panchayat in pursuance of advertisement dated 14.07.2014 under Annexure-1 or in the alternative to consider his case as per 2^nd advertisement with regard to preference category;

¶26

`

¶27

And further be pleased to direct the opp. Parties to give all consequential service benefits:

¶28

Page 3 of 6

¶29

Or pass any other order(s) direction(s) as this Hon’ble Court may think fit and proper,

¶30

And allow this Writ Application.”

¶31

Mr. Satyajit Behera, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the authorities had acted in a manner contrary to the directions of this Court inasmuch as the Collector’s order directing the B.D.O. to conclude the selection process pursuant to the advertisement dated 14.07.2014 was not given effect to. On the contrary, a fresh advertisement was issued. Moreover, in the fresh selection process, the experience of the petitioner was never taken into consideration.

¶32

Mr. Sarbeswar Behera, learned Additional Government Advocate, on the other hand would argue that once the petitioner chose to apply pursuant to the fresh advertisement, he is estopped from contending that the selection process pursuant to the earlier advertisement issued in 2014 should be completed. Moreover, he participated in the fresh selection and was unsuccessful. Therefore, he cannot challenge the selection of the final

¶33

Page 4 of 6

¶34

merit list published. Mr. Behera, further submits that even otherwise, the petitioner’s performance as a Jogan Sahayak (Supply Assistant) on adhoc basis was beset with several irregularities and misconducts. Therefore, his experience as such could not have been considered.

¶35

After hearing learned counsel for the parties and taking note of the rival contentions narrated above, this Court is primarily of the view that the petitioner having willfully participated in the selection process held pursuant to the fresh advertisement i.e., issued on 07.07.2023, is estopped from contending that the selection process pursuant to the earlier advertisement ought to have been completed. Moreover, having participated in the selection process and having failed to be selected on merit, he is also estopped to challenge the selection process.

¶36

This Court is, therefore, not inclined to grant the relief claimed by the petitioner. It is, however, stated at the bar that there are some vacancies available against which

¶37

Page 5 of 6

¶38

the petitioner’s candidature can be considered taking into account his experience. In this regard the petitioner has also approached the Collector, Kalahandi by submitting a representation on 28.08.2024. Said representation is pending. Such being the case, the writ application is disposed of by directing the Collector, Kalahandi to consider the representation submitted by the petitioner and to take a decision thereon in accordance with law within two months from the date of production of certified copy of this order.

¶39

While disposing the representation the Collector shall also consider the previous experience of the petitioner for which, it shall be open to him to submit appropriate material.

¶40

……..…………………..

¶41

Sashikanta Mishra, Judge

¶42

Orissa High Court, Cuttack The 22^nd of January, 2025/ P. Ghadai

¶43

Signature Not Verified

¶44

Digitally Signed Signed by: PUSPANJALI GHADAI Reason: Authentication Location: High Court of Orissa, C utta ck. Date: 03-Feb-2025 11:37:46

¶45

Page 6 of 6

Ramachandra Mundachhina v. State of Odisha

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ramachandra Mundachhina v. State of Odisha

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Gourab Khaparade @ Gourab Khapade Vs State of Odisha

Chandrakant Subash Patil Vs State of Odisha

Raja @ Rajkishore Das Vs State of Odisha

Parikhita Mahal Vs State of Odisha

Bimala Baliarsingh @ Palai Vs State of Odisha

Susant Kumar Polai Vs State of Odisha