Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK
KRISHNA S.DIXIT, CHITTARANJAN DASH
State of Odisha – Appellant
Versus
Nirupama Jena – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. order quashing based on recruitment irregularities. (Para 1) |
| 2. argument on corrigendum's effects on eligibility. (Para 2) |
| 3. argument supporting the position of the respondent. (Para 3) |
| 4. court analysis referencing previous cases. (Para 4 , 5) |
| 5. unjust to withdraw employment after verification. (Para 6) |
JUDGMENT :
KRISHNA S DIXIT, J
1. This Intra-Court Appeal of the State and its officials seeks to call in question the learned Single Judge’s order dated 04.03.2025, whereby Respondent-employee’s W.P.(C) No.9688 of 2016 having been favoured, the following relief has been accorded to her:
“In the result, the writ petition is allowed. The impugned order under Annexure-7 is hereby quashed. The opposite parties are directed to allow the petitioner to continue as Sikshya Sahayak with all consequential service and financial benefits.”
2. Learned AGA appearing for the Appellants-State vehemently argues that initially the recruitment advertisement was issued on 11.09.2014; subsequently, a corrigendum came to be issued on 09.02.2016 fixing 28.02.2016 to be the last date for filing the applications. The object of issuing the corrigendum was to benefit the eligible and qualified ca
Employment law principles dictate that once engagement is confirmed and no fraud exists, the original recruitment process must honor eligibility extensions introduced via corrigendum.
Eligibility criteria for recruitment must be strictly adhered to, and any changes post-selection cannot retroactively affect concluded processes.
In public recruitment, candidates must satisfy essential eligibility criteria by the prescribed cut-off date. Administrative representations do not create enforceable rights, and participants who acc....
Appointment – Right of a candidate for being considered in terms of advertisement stands crystallized on the date of publication of advertisement – Any subsequent amendment to advertisement during co....
The delay and negligence on the part of a third-party cannot preclude the requirement of possessing the educational qualification before the cut-off date, as mandated by the statutory rules.
Public orders must be clear and cannot be supplemented by later explanations; failure to clarify age limits led to an unjust outcome for the petitioner.
Employment and Service matter - Qualification and experience - Posts of Sericulture Demonstrator - Doctrine of estoppels - Principle of estoppel as applicable to Petitioners therein, it is seen that ....
Though the rejection of the candidatures of the petitioners appear to be on the ground of not acquiring the TET qualification within a particular age, it is an admitted fact that all the petitioners ....
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
