The court ruled that procedural fairness in document verification necessitates allowing a candidate to fulfill document requirements even post-verification, affirming the legal weight of attested copies.

JUDGMENT :

SASHIKANTA MISHRA, J.

1. The petitioner has approached this Court with the following prayer:-

“It is therefore, prayed that this Hon’ble Court may be graciously pleased to admit this writ application, issue Rule Nisi in calling upon the Opposite Parties to file show cause as to why the impugned order under Annexure-8 dated 01.05.2024 and order dated 04.06.2020 under Anneure-7 series and order dated 28.10.2019 under Annexure-6 shall not be quashed/set aside and the petitioner shall not be made engagement of her for the post of ASHA for village-Sankarpur under Gandarda Gram Panchayat of Remuna Block of District-Balasore instead of Opposite Party No.9 with immediate effect for a just decision of the case.”

2. The facts of the case, briefly stated, are that an advertisement vide notification dated 23.09.2019 was issued by the A.N.M. of Gandarda Sub-Center of Remuna CHC inviting applications for engagement of ASHA for Sankarpur village. The petitioner submitted her application along with all required documents. The verification of documents was held on 17.10.2019, when the petitioner, though present could not produce her original matriculation compartmental certificate due to unavoidable circumstances. The provisional merit list was published on the same day, wherein the petitioner was found to have secured the highest marks among all candidates. On the next day i.e., on 18.10.2019, the petitioner submitted an application before the ANM seeking leave to produce the original certificate as she could not do so earlier because of the serious illness of her mother. However, the authorities did not accede to her request and published the final merit list on 28.10.2019, selecting Opposite Party No.9 as ASHA on the ground that the petitioner had not produced her original certificate during verification.

3. The petitioner approached this Court in W.P.(C) No.27875 of 2019 challenging such decision, which was disposed of vide order dated 13.01.2020 directing the BDO, Remuna to consider her representation. No action was taken by the BDO but by order dated 04.06.2020, the Selection Committee considered the matter and held that the candidature of the petitioner had been rightly rejected. The Petitioner, therefore, again approached this Court in W.P.(C) No.25681 of 2020. By order dated 07.03.2024, this Court held that the Selection Committee could not have decided the matter on the principle that no person can be a judge of his own cause. As such, the Nodal Officer was directed to consider the representation after granting an opportunity of personal hearing to the Petitioner. By order dated 01.05.2024, the Nodal Officer rejected the representation, by holding that the Petitioner was not eligible for selection as ASHA as she had not produced the original 10th mark-sheet at the time of document verification on 17.10.2019. Challenging such rejection of her representation, the Petitioner has approached this Court in the present writ application with the prayer as quoted before.

It is contended by the Petitioner that since the advertisement indicated that seven days’ time was to be given for inviting objections from the date of verification of documents and publication of the provisional merit list, the Selection Committee ought to have granted time to the Petitioner to produce her original certificate instead of acting in haste.

4. Counter affidavit has been filed by the B.D.O, Remuna (O.P. No.6). It is stated that the Petitioner