The court upheld the validity of the Respondent's appointment as Hindi Teacher, affirming that qualifications including 'Rashtrabhasha Shastri' are equivalent to Bachelor's Degree and emphasizing respect for selection committee's discretion.

JUDGMENT :

MURAHARI SRI RAMAN, J.

Assailing legality, propriety and rationality in disposing of the writ petition, bearing W.P.(C) No.23296 of 2021, vide Judgment dated 21st November, 2024 rendered by a learned Single Bench of this Court exercising powers under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India in, wherein and whereby the eligibility of the Respondent No.4 for the post of Hindi Teacher as questioned by the Appellant stood rejected, the afore-noted intra-Court appeal is preferred under Clause 10 of the Letters Patent Constituting the High Court of Judicature at Patna read with Article 4 of the Orissa High Court Order, 1948 and Rule 6 of Chapter-III and Rule 2 of Chapter-VIII of the Rules of the High Court of Orissa, 1948.

Facts:

2. Responding to invitation to apply for the posts inter alia Hindi Teacher published in the Advertisement No.2333/ SSD, dated 10^th October, 2018, the Appellant, belonging to Socially and Educationally Backward Class category and qualified Bachelor of Arts in Hindi (Degree Course) from Shobhit University, Meerut in the year 2013, Bachelor of Education from Dakshina Bharat Hindi Prachar Sabha in the year 2015 and “Rashtrabhasha Shastri” from Odisha Rashtrabhasa Parishad, Puri in the year 2017; and whereas the Respondent No.4 qualified Bachelor of Arts (Degree Course) from Sambalpur University in the year 2013, Bachelor of Education from Dakshina Bharat Hindi Prachar Sabha in the year 2017 and “Rashtrabhasha Shastri” from Odisha Rashtrabhasa Parishad, Puri in the year 2018 offered candidature for the said category of post for appointment in the High School/Girls' High School running in Nuapada District under the aegis of the Scheduled Tribe and Scheduled Caste Development, Minorities and Backward Classes Department.

2.1. On completion of selection process, a final select list was published on 27th November, 2019, where the Respondent No.4 was shown to have been selected against the vacant post of Hindi Teacher (Unreserved category), but the Appellant was included in the waiting list.

2.2. Raising objection to such selection and appointment of the Respondent No.4, the Appellant made a representation before the Collector, Nuapada. Though the Respondent No.4, belongs to SEBC category, as he secured 790 marks out of 1800 marks, i.e., 43.88% marks in Degree Course, whereas the Appellant secured more than 50% marks, the selection of the Respondent No.4 is not in consonance with the requirement as specified in the Advertisement. It is the requirement with respect to academic qualification that the candidate must have secured more than 50% marks in aggregate (45% marks for SEBC candidate) in Bachelor Degree in Arts/Commerce. Therefore, it is the case of the Appellant that the Respondent No.4 having no basic eligibility could not have been selected inasmuch as he was not entitled to even qualify to appear at the Odisha Secondary School Teacher Eligibility Test.

2.3. Since such representation yielded no result, the Appellant approached this Court by way of filing a writ petition, being W.P.(C) No.4878 of 2020, which was disposed of on 17^th February, 2020 with a direction to consider said representation and pass an appropriate order. The Collector, Nuapada having heard the contentions of the Appellant, rejected the claim of the Appellant assigning reason that by taking into consideration the marks secured in “Rashtrabhasha Shastri” the Respondent No.4 was selected, since his marks were found to be higher in percentage of mark than the Appellant. Such rejection order was communicated to the Appellant vide Letter No.550, dated 9^th February, 2021 which was subject matter of challenge in the writ petition.

2.4. Assailing the refusal to accede to the c