The petitioners had a vested right to employment and were entitled to the reliefs asked for.

JUDGMENT :

D.P. CHOUDHURY, J.

Challenge has been made to the inaction of the Opp. Parties in not giving employment to the petitioners in spite of their selection to the posts applied for.

FACTS :

2. The factual matrix leading to the case of the petitioners is that opp. Party no.1 issued an advertisement bearing No.1/13 dated 8.5.2013 inviting applications from the eligible and intending candidates for filling up of 15 posts of Junior Clerk-cum-Copyist in the Judgeship of Bhadrak vide Annexure-1. The petitioners being eligible for the criteria, made applications and accordingly they were found selected as per the merit list prepared for Junior Clerk-cum-Typist vide office order No.191 dated 14.06.2014 vide Annexure-2. The petitioners found their place at sl. Nos.12 and 17 respectively in the merit list. Although there were 15 posts, but merit list was prepared for 19 posts. When petitioner no.1 being in sl.no.1 did not get any letter of appointment in spite of vacancies of 15 posts, he made application under R.T.I. Act. According to the information available to petitioner no.1, he found that appointment orders were issued to five candidates and remaining ten posts were left to be filled up after opening of Grama Nyayalaya at Dhamnagar and other recruitment.

3. It is stated that candidates at sl.nos.1, 3, 6, 7 and 11 were issued with appointment letters. Due to non-joining of sl.no.1, sl.no.2 was issued with the order of appointment, but sl.no.2 did not join, for which the candidate at sl.no.4 of the merit list was issued with the order of appointment and he joined in the post. It is further stated that when there is selection process started giving vacancies of 15 posts, it is illegal on the part of the opp. Parties having not filled up all the posts. The reasons of keeping ten posts vacant after opening of Grama Nyayalaya at Dhamnagar as revealed from the information available under the R.T.I. Act are only to cause delay the appointment and depriving the petitioners from being appointed. So, the petitioners having no other efficacious remedy approached this Court with a prayer for directing the opp. Parties to issue order of appointment in their favour.

4. Per contra, the opp. Parties filed counter affidavit through opp. Party no.2, wherein they submitted that the writ application is not maintainable on fact and law. It is the case of the opp. Parties that there was advertisement for filling up posts vide Annexure-A/2. The posts were advertised keeping in view the existing vacancies and the future vacancies to be filled up for the establishment of Grama Nyayalaya at Dhamnagar. For such Grama Nyayalaya, ten vacancies including one Nyayadhikari, one post each for Sheristadar, Junior Stenographer, Junior Clerk, Driver, Process-Server and Peon. Similarly, the Law Department has created two posts of Junior Clerk for the establishment of the court of Civil Judge (Junior Division)-cum-J.M.F.C. at Dhamnagar.

5. It is also stated in the counter affidavit that originally vacancies were six i.e. one Junior Clerk-cum-Typist in the court of Civil Judge (Junior Division)-cum-J.M.F.C., Chandbali and 5 nos. of Junior Clerk-cum-Typists in the establishment of District Judge, Bhadrak. It is stated that for existing, future vacancies and consequential vacancies, vacancies were total 15 in numbers. In the counter affidavit following has been detailed as to the vacancies in the Judgeship:-

Future Vacancy and consequential Vacancy =09

(a) Gramya Nyalaya, Dhamnagar created by the Govt. of Odisha, in Law Deptt. Letter No.1217/L, dtd.02.02.2012 under Annexure-B/2.

Jr. Clerk	02
Head Clerk	01
Total	03

(b) Civil Judge (Jr. Divn)-cum-JMFC, Dhamnagar created by the Govt. of Odisha in Law Deptt. Letter No.11747/L