Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation

2024 Supreme(Ori) 351

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK
S.K. PANIGRAHI, J.
Aditya Mirdha & Ors. - Petitioners
versus
State of Odisha &Ors. - Opp. Parties
WP(C) No. 26084 of 2024 along with W.P.(C) Nos. 26256, 26259, 26432, 26450, 26483, 26560, 26677, 27033, 27122, 27172, 27192, 27459, 27751, 28138, 28556, 28837, 29158, 29347, 29486, 31136 & 31423 of 2024
Decided On : 17-12-2024

Advocates Appeared:
For the Petitioners: Mr. Priyaranjan Singh, Adv. Mr. Jugal Kishore Panda, Adv. Mr. Biplaba P.B. Bahali, Adv. Mr. Kshirod Kumar Rout, Adv. Mr. Anurag Pati, Adv. Mr. Manoranjan Padhi, Adv. Mr. Madan Mohan Das, Adv. Mr. Gyan Ranjan Sethi, Adv. Mr. Prakash Chandra Dash, Adv.
For the Opp. Parties : Mr. Saswat Das, AGA, Mr. Sonak Mishra, ASC., Adv.

The court affirmed that exceptional circumstances may necessitate a one-time relaxation of recruitment age limits to ensure fairness, particularly due to delays caused by the pandemic.

Headnote:(A) Odisha Police Motor Transport and Odisha State Armed Police (Special Security) Battalion Service Rules, 2022 - Rule 2 of the Orissa Civil Service (Fixation of Upper Age Limit) Rules, 1989 - Recruitment for Drivers - Advertisement setting upper age limit at 23 years challenged - Petitioners exceeded age limit due to COVID-19 disruptions, seeking relaxation. (Paras 2, 3, 4, 12, 23)

(B) Judicial Review - Courts exhibit restraint in policy matters unless violations of rights or statutory provisions are evident - Mandamus may compel lawful action if discretion is not properly exercised. (Paras 8, 9, 10)

(C) Policy Considerations - The discretion regarding age relaxation in recruitment lies within the executive's purview - Principles of equity and justice require exceptional measures, in light of disruptions caused by pandemic. (Paras 21, 24)

Facts of the case:
Petitioners challenged the upper age limit for Drivers in the Odisha Police Motor Transport set by an advertisement dated 03.10.2024, claiming it violated their rights due to disruptions caused by the COVID-19 pandemic. An upper age limit of 23 years was set, with relaxations for reserved categories, which excluded eligible candidates. (Paras 3-4)

Findings of Court:
The court allowed a one-time relaxation of the upper age limit for the present candidates, adjusting it by four years and permitting them to participate in the recruitment process while ensuring they meet all selection criteria. (Paras 23, 24, 26)

Issues: The main issues were whether the Court could compel the relaxation of the upper age limit and the applicability of the Orissa Civil Service (Fixation of Upper Age Limit) Rules, 1989 in relation to the specific recruitment rules set out for P.M.T. Drivers. (Paras 7, 15)

Ratio Decidendi: The court held that it could not compel the executive to change recruitment policies unless there was a clear violation of rights. However, it also recognized that extraordinary circumstances, such as pandemic-related delays, warranted exceptional remedial measures to ensure fairness in recruitment. (Paras 22-23)

Result: W.P.

(C) No. 26084 of 2024 is allowed, and connected Writ Petitions are disposed of accordingly.

Table of Content
1. clarification of cases and common issues. (Para 1 , 2 , 3)
2. petitioners argue for age relaxation justification. (Para 4 , 5)
3. court evaluates authority's discretion in recruitment. (Para 6 , 7)
4. separation of powers; court's role in policy matters. (Para 8 , 9 , 10 , 11 , 12)
5. rules governing recruitment process identified. (Para 13 , 14 , 15)
6. discussion on pandemic's impact and age relaxation. (Para 16 , 17 , 18 , 19 , 20 , 21 , 22)
7. court's decision on age relaxation and future implications. (Para 23 , 24 , 25 , 26 , 27 , 28 , 29 , 30 , 31)

Judgment :

S.K. Panigrahi, J.

1. Since common question of facts and law are involved in all the above- mentioned Writ Petitions, the same were heard together and are being disposed of by this common judgment. However, this Court felt it apposite to deal with W.P.(C) No.26084 of 2024 as the leading case for proper adjudication of all these cases.

2. The Petitioners have filed the above-mentioned Writ Petitions challenging the Advertisement No.1924 dated 03.10.2024 issued by the Chairman, State Selection Board, Odisha Police for recruitment to the post of Drivers in the Police Motor Transport, Odisha.

I. FACTUAL MATRIX OF THE CASE:

3. Succinctly put, the facts of the case are as follows:

(i) An advertisement dated 03.10.2024, for recruitment to the posts of Drivers in the Police Motor Transport (PMT), was issued by the State Selection Board, Odisha Police. The advertisement delineated a total of 405 vacancies.

(ii) Clause 3 of the advertisement specified the age criteria, stating that candidates had to be at least 18 years and no more than 23 years of age as of 01.01.2024. An additional relaxation of five years was provided for candidates belonging to the SC/ST/SEBC categories.

(iii) Candidates were required to have passed the High School Certificate Examination (Matriculation/10th Class) conducted by the Board of Secondary Education, Odisha, or an equivalent examination conducted by any other recognized Board or Council.

(iv) The selection process comprised a written test (Computer-Based Recruitment Examination), followed by Physical Measurement, Physical Efficiency Tests, Driving Test, and Medical Examination for shortlisted candidates.

(v) The Advertisement for recruitment to the concerned posts was issued on 07.03.2020. No subsequent recruitment carried out, reportedly due to the disruption caused by the Covid-19 pandemic.

(vi) The petitioners had successfully passed the High School Certificate Examination, thereby meeting the prescribed minimum educational qualification and eligibility criteria.

(vii) However, since then, the petitioners had exceeded the prescribed upper age limit of 23 years and were consequently ineligible to apply for the posts. Similarly, candidates from the SC/ST/SEBC categories had also surpassed the specified upper age limit. As a result, this batch of writ petitions was filed, seeking this Court’s interference to allow the petitioners to participate in the recruitment process by granting appropriate relaxation in the upper age limit.

II. PETITIONERS’ SUBMISSIONS:

4. Learned counsel for the Petitioner earnestly made the following submissions in support of his contentions.

(i) The petitioners contended that Clause 3 of the advertisement dated 03.10.2024, prescribing an upper age limit at 23 years, is illegal, arbitrary, and contrary to Rule 2 of the Orissa Civil Service (Fixation of Upper Age Limit) Rules, 1989. The said rule prescribes an upper age limit of 32 years for entry into government service, unless a specific higher age limit is provided for a particular post or service. Since Rule 2 contains a non-obstante clause and is framed under the proviso to Article 309 of the Constitution, it overrides the Odisha Police Motor Transport and Odisha State Armed Police (Special Security) Battalion Service (Method of Recruitment and Conditions of Service of Drivers) Rules, 2022.

(ii) The petitioners further submitted that the Orissa Civil Service (Fixation o