IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK
BIRAJA PRASANNA SATAPATHY, J.
Jyotiranjan Dash – Appellant
Versus
D.G. & I.G. of Police & Ors. – Respondents
WPC(OAC) No.3429 of 2013
Decided on : 20-04-2022
Height Requirement - Recruitment Process - Method of Recruitment and Conditions of Service of Sepoys/Constables in Batalions Rules, 2011 - The court held that the eligibility of the candidate can be verified at any stage of the recruitment process. After completion of the recruitment process, the petitioner was issued with the letter of appointment, and thus, the action of not allowing the petitioner to undergo training on the ground of not meeting the prescribed height was deemed impermissible by the court.
Fact of the Case:
The petitioner participated in the selection process for the post of constable and was issued a letter of appointment. However, he was sent back from training due to not meeting the prescribed height requirement.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the action of not allowing the petitioner to undergo training on the ground of not meeting the prescribed height was not permissible after he had been issued with the letter of appointment.
Issues: The main issue was whether the petitioner could be sent back from training for not meeting the prescribed height requirement after being issued with the letter of appointment.
Ratio Decidendi: The court held that the eligibility of the candidate can be verified at any stage of the recruitment process, but after the completion of the recruitment process and issuance of the appointment letter, the action of not allowing the petitioner to undergo training on the ground of not meeting the prescribed height was not permissible.
Final Decision: The court directed the authorities to allow the petitioner to undergo the training and, upon completion, to continue as a constable in the 6th India Reserve Battalion, Khurda.
JUDGMENT :
Biraja Prasanna Satapathy, J.
1. This matter is taken up through Hybrid Mode.
2. Heard MR. G.R. Sethi, learned counsel for the Petitioner and Mr. M.K. Balabantaray, learned Standing counsel for the State-Opposite Parties.
3. The Petitioner in the present Writ Petition has prayed for the following relief:-
ii) To direct the respondents to grant all financial and consequential benefits to applicant from 7.09.2013 the date when he has reported for joining.
iii) And pass such other order/orders as may be deemed fit and proper for the interest of justice.”
4. It is submitted by Mr. Sethi, learned counsel for the Petitioner that pursuant to the advertisement issued by the State Selection Board, Odisha Police under Annexure-1, the Petitioner duly participated in the selection process and on being found suitable, he was issued with the letter of intimation by the Office of O.P. No.3 vide letter No.3220 dtd.03.09.2013 under Annexure-2, indicating his appointment as temporary Constable.
5. It is also submitted by Mr. Sethi, learned counsel for the Petitioner that pursuant to the order dtd.03.09.2013 under Annexure-2, the Petitioner appeared before Opp. Party No.3 on 07.09.2013 with all his original certificates to undergo the training. It is submitted that on 13.09.2013 while taking physical measurement when it was noticed that the Petitioner possesses less height than the prescribed height for the post of Constable, he was sent back by the said Opp. Party No.3. Accordingly, the Petitioner was deprived from being allowed to continue as against the post of Constable, even though he was issued with the letter of appointment under Annexure-2.
6. It is submitted by Mr. Sethi, learned counsel for the Petitioner that after completion of the selection process in every respect, the Petitioner was issued with the letter of appointment under Annexure-2 by making his appointment as a temporary Constable. Therefore, Opp. Party No.3 had no occasion to cause physical measurement of the Petitioner once again and denying the Petitioner to undergo the training on the ground that he does not possess the prescribed height for the post of Constable. In support of aforesaid submission, Mr. Sethi, learned counsel for the Petitioner also relied on a decision of this Court reported in the case of Sabyasachi Lenka & Ors. v. State of Odisha& Ors. reported in 2019 (I) ILR-CUT-752.
7. Mr. Sethi, learned counsel for the Petitioner brought to the notice of this Court the relevant Recruitment Rules prescribed by the Home Department vide notification dtd.22.03.2011 i.e. Method of Recruitment and Conditions of Service of Sepoys/Constables in Batalions Rules, 2011. Mr. Sethi, learned counsel for the Petitioner submitted that this Court relying on the pari materia provision contained in the Odisha Industrial Security Force (Method of Recruitment and Conditions of Service of Constable Rules) 2014, in Para 14 of the aforesaid decision in Sabyasachi Lenka’s case, held as follows:-
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.