The 'catch up' rule is applicable to maintain seniority in promotional posts, justifying the placement of a candidate over another based on seniority in the initial grade.

JUDGMENT

Dr. B.R. Sarangi, J. - The petitioner, by means of this writ petition, seeks to quash the final gradation list of Chief Fire Officers published by opposite party no.1 in letter no. 15658/CD dated 15.04.2021 under Annexure-5, and to issue direction to opposite party no.1 to restore the seniority of the petitioner over and above the opposite party no.4 and consider him for promotion to such higher post and to grant him all consequential service and financial benefits within a stipulated period.

2. The factual matrix of the case, in short, is that the State Government issued an advertisement, which was published during the year 1984 to fill up vacancies of Station Officer in Odisha Fire Service Organization. The recruitment process was conducted by the Central Selection Board on 9th and 10th February, 1984. In the said recruitment process, 13 candidates were short listed for appointment to the post of the Station Officer in Odisha Fire Service. They were appointed in two dates, i.e., on 24.02.1984 (ten candidates) and 29.03.1984 (three candidates), pursuant to which they joined on 07.03.1984 and 30.03.1984 respectively. The petitioner joined on 07.03.1984 and the opposite party no.4 joined on 30.03.1984. The petitioner and opposite party no.4 belonged to one select list prepared by the Central Selection Board. After fulfilling the official procedure, all 13 candidates were put to prescribed Station Officers' course of training in a single batch, i.e. 8th batch of Station Officer Course of training at Odisha Fire Service Training Institute, Bhubaneswar. After completion of training course, the final examination was conducted, in which opposite party no.4 secured 1st position, whereas petitioner secured 11th position.

2.1. As per Police Order No. 110, the inter se seniority of the passed out Station Officers was fixed basing upon their marks secured in the final examination of training. As such, Odisha Fire Service being a wing of Police, is governed by PMR, and accordingly the inter-se seniority of Station Officers of 8th batch was determined as per their marks secured in the final examination where the opposite party no.4 stood first position and the petitioner placed at sl.no.11 in the list prepared by the authority. After completion of requisite training course, all the 13 officers were posted to different Fire Stations. The gradation list of 8th batch was published vide office order no. 17/FS, dated 22.01.1995 and D.O. No. 359/OFS, dated 02.02.1985. All the officers were communicated with a copy of gradation list and the same was reflected in their respective service books. In the meanwhile, with due adherence Orissa Reservation of Vacancies in Post of Services (for Schedule Casts and Schedule Tribes) Act, 1975 (hereinafter referred to as 'ORV Act, 1975') the petitioner got promotion to the rank of Asst. Fire Officer (AFO) on 20.02.1997, being a schedule caste candidate, even though he was placed in the lower place in the initial gradation list. By virtue of the benefits of reservation quota, the petitioner was allowed to officiate as Deputy Fire Officer, Fire Officer and Chief Fire Officer w.e.f. 31.10.2005, 07.08.2008 and 10.06.2013 respectively by superseding the general category candidates like that of opposite party no.4, and now continuing as such. Whereas, being an unreserved/general category candidate, opposite party no.4 did not avail any reservation facilities. Consequentially, he was promoted to the rank of Asst. Fire Officer, Deputy Fire Officer, Fire Officer and Chief Fire Officer w.e.f. 09.06.2008, 16.07.2012, 14.02.2014 and 16.05.2019 respectively on his own merit without any leverage.

2.2 The opposite party no.4 was not placed in the same rank with that of the petitioner until dated 15.05.2019. On 16.05.2019, when opposite party no.4 was promoted to the rank of Chief Fire Officer, was placed in the same footing with the petitioner and basing on 'catch up' rule, he was placed over the petitioner on the bas