Once a disability certificate is accepted for employment, it cannot be questioned later based solely on administrative errors, unless fraud is proven.

JUDGMENT :

SASHIKANTA MISHRA, J.

An advertisement was issued by the Collector, Dhenkanal on 21.01.2011 inviting applications for engagement to the post of Sikshya Sahayak in the district of Dhenkanal. 257 vacancies were notified for Dhenkanal Education District including 22 vacancies meant for Disability (PH) category. The petitioner being visually impaired person, applied for the post on the basis of disability certificates issued in her favour by the concerned Medical Board. She was found suitable in the selection process and was engaged in the post of Sikshya Sahayak by order dated 02.04.2011 being posted in Siarimalia Primary School. After completion of three years of continuous service as Sikshya Sahayak, she was engaged as Junior Teacher in the year 2014. In the meantime, one Basudeb Sahoo, an unsuccessful candidate in the selection process challenged the selection process before this Court in W.P.(C) No. 25903 of 2011, particularly alleging that the disability certificate of the candidates were forged and fabricated in which the petitioner was not made a party. By order dated 05.05.2015 passed in the aforementioned writ application, this Court directed the Director of Vigilance to cause an enquiry to be made in the matter by verifying the relevant records and registers of the concerned Medical and Appellate Medical Board. Pursuant to such direction, the District Project Coordinator, Dhenkanal directed all the disability candidates including the petitioner to appear before the Appellate Medical Board at SCB Medical College and Hospital, Cuttack on 18.05.2015 and again on 30.06.2015, but she never received the same and hence, would not appear. In the enquiry conducted by the Vigilance Department, the disability certificate issued in favour of the petitioner and submitted by her at the time of submitting application in the year 2011 was held to be genuine but the date mentioned is different. Basing on such report, the candidates were directed to remain present in the office of the Collector on 15.10.2015 for personal hearing and the petitioner also appeared. However, by order dated 16.10.2015, the Collector issued order for disengagement of the candidates, which was not served upon the petitioner. Alleging that the enquiry report is erroneous and based on misconception of the relevant facts, the petitioner has approached this Court in the instant writ petition seeking the following prayer.:

“The petitioner most respectfully prays that the Hon’ble Court may be graciously pleased to allow the writ petition, issue a writ or direction in the nature of certiorari or any other appropriate writ or direction questioning Office Order No. 1921 (13) dated 16.10.2015 of the Collector-cum-Chief Executive Officer, Zilla Parishad, Dhenkanal under Annexure-6 and pass such order or further order or orders as are deemed just and proper.”

2. Counter affidavit has been filed by District Project Officer, SSA, Dhenkanal (opposite party No.4). It is stated that all the candidates who were engaged as Sikshya Sahayak under PH category were asked to appear before the respective Medical Boards constituted by the Superintendent of SCB Medical College and Hospital, Cuttack on 18.05.2015, out of whom some, including the petitioner did not appear. The percentage of physical disability of the candidates who appeared for re-examination was assessed. Further, as per direction of this Court, an enquiry was conducted by the Vigilance Police, wherein it was found that only 8 candidates out of 22 are actually eligible for the post of Sikshya Sah