The main legal point established in the judgment is the application of fair play and non-discrimination principles in service jurisprudence, emphasizing equal treatment for similarly situated employees without discrimination.

ORDER

1. The present writ application has been filed by the Petitioner after failing to get the desired result from the authorities despite direction issued in earlier round of litigation by this Court to consider the case of the present Petitioner.

2. In the present writ application, the Petitioner seeks to challenge the order dated 3rd December, 2020 under Annexure-7 and order dated 27th October 2021 under Annexure-11 passed by the Director, Secondary Education, Odisha, Bhubaneswar and the Principal Secretary, Department of School & mass Education respectively. The Petitioner further prays for a direction to the Opposite Parties to appoint her in the post of Contractual Hindi Teacher pursuant to the Government Resolution No.27th October, 2014 under Annexure-2 with all consequential service benefits at par with her counterparts.

3. Heard learned counsel for the Petitioner and Mr.Sangram Jena, leaned Standing Counsel for School & Mass Education department.

4. The factual backdrops of the case, in a nutshell, is that the Petitioner after successful completion of +3 Arts from Utkal University in the year 1999 obtained Sastri (Hindi) from Orissa Rastrabhasa Parishad, Puri in the year 2014. She also successfully completed and obtained the degree of M.A. (Hindi) from Shobhit University, Meerut.

5. The Government of Odisha reviewed Teachers strength in various Schools in the State and found that there is scarcity of teachers in different Schools in the State of Odisha. To resolve the said problem faced by students in the Schools, the Opposite Party No.1 issued a Resolution No.23404/SME dated 27th October, 2014 notifying the recruitment procedure of teaching staff in Government Secondary Schools. Pursuant to the said Government Notification dated 27th October, 2014, the Petitioner submitted her candidature for appointment as a contractual Hindi Teacher as she has the requisite qualification as provided in Clause 3(f) of the Resolution dated 27th October, 2014. The said Clause 3(f) of Resolution dated 27th October, 2014 has been extracted herein below:

'(f) Hindi Teacher Bachelor's degree from a recognized University with Hindi as one of the elective subject with minimum 50% marks in aggregate (45% for SC/ST/PH/OBC/SEBC candidates) or with Rastrabhasa Ratna from Rastrabhasa Prachar Samiti, Wardha or with Sastri from Orissa Rastrabhasa Parisada, Puri or with Snataka (Acquired by June-2005, the date up to which the temporary recognition has been granted) from Hindi Sikshya Samiti, Orissa, Cuttack or an equivalent degree from a recognized institution with at least 50% marks in aggregate (45% for SC/ST/PH/OBC/SEBC candidates) and Hindi Sikshyan Parangat from Kendriya Hindi Sansthan, Agra/B.H.Ed ( a course prescribed by NCTE) from a Institution recognized by NCTE and affiliated to a recognized university/ B.Ed in Hindi (a course prescribed by NCTE) from Dakhin Bharat Hindi Prachar Sabha, Madras, a institution recognized by NCTE and affiliated to a recognized university.

OR

Bachelor's degree with Hindi as one of the optional/Hons subject with minimum 50% of marks in aggregate (45% for SC/ST/PH/OBC/SEBC candidates) and M.A. in Hindi with minimum 50% marks in aggregate from a recognized University.

(The untrained candidates shall have to undergo required training within the timeline as prescribed by Govt.)'

6. As stated hereinabove, the Petitioner submitted her application bearing No.10022288 for selection and appointment as Contractual Hindi Teacher. While the matter stood thus, the authorities published a draft reject list which was uploaded in the website. The said draft reject list reveals that the application of the Petitioner was rejected and her name finds place against Sl. No.264 with remark 'Untrained (+3 without Hindi as a subject)'. Thereafter the Petitioner had filed an objection to the said rejection on 24th February, 2016. However, the same has not been considered as of now.

7. It is further pleaded in the writ application that the Petiti