Page 1 of 4

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK

WPC (OAC) No. 2582 of 2008

Prafulla Kumar Nayak

&.

Petitioner

Ms. B.K. Pattnaik, Advocate

-Versus -

State of Odisha and others

&.

Opposite Parties

Mr. N.K. Praharaj,

Standing Counsel

CORAM:

DR. JUSTICE B.R. SARANGI

ORDER

02.02.2022

This matter is taken up through video conferencing mode.

2.

The petitioner has filed this writ petition seeking to

quash the selection of opposite party no.4 against the Home

Guard category, and to issue direction to the opposite parties

to select and appoint him as constable under Home Guard

category with effect from the date when others have got

appointment in pursuance of the selection under Annexure-5

with all benefits.

3.

Ms. B.K. Pattnaik, learned counsel for the petitioner

contended that the petitioner, who was working as a Home

Guard, though appeared before the selection committee

against the reserved vacancies of 10% to get into the service

as a regular constable, the same has been denied by the

authority. Therefore, the petitioner has approached this Court

by filing the present writ petition.

4.

Mr. N.K. Praharaj, learned Standing Counsel

contended that against 10% quota, one post was made

Order No.

03

Page 2 of 4

available for the SEBC category. Since one candidate,

namely, Nirajan Sahoo, has secured higher marks than that of

the petitioner, he has been given appointment and, thereby, the

case of the petitioner has not been considered. Thereby, no

illegality or irregularity has been committed by the authority

so as to warrant interference of this Court.

5.

Having heard learned counsel for the parties and after

going through the records, this Court finds that Orissa Police

Service (Method of Recruitment and Conditions of Service of

Constables) Order, 2006 regulates the recruitment to the post

of Constables, of which para-8 of sub-section 3 provides about

the procedure of reservation in respect of Home Guard

candidates. Para-8 of Sub-section (3) is extracted hereunder:-

<There shall be 10% reservation of notified

vacancies in the rank of constables in each district

for Home Guards in each recruitment year. They

will be eligible against the reserved vacancy under

the respective category to which they belong, i.e.,

U.R., SEBC, S.C. and S.T.

6.

As the number of vacancies of constables of the

district was 94, the break up of vacancies being calculated as

per the Government instructions which are extracted

hereunder:-

<U.R.

50%

S.T.

22.5%

S.C.

16.25%

S.E.B.C.

11.25%

47

21

15

11=

7.

As it appears, there shall be 10% reservation in the

rank of constable for Home Guards in each recruitment year

and they will be eligible against the reserved vacancy under

the respective category to which they belong to. As such, 10%

of reservation of notified vacancies are to be reserved for

Page 3 of 4

Home Guard candidates and being calculated category-wise,

the reservation comes for U.R.H.G.-05, S.T.H.G.-02,

S.C.H.G.-01 and SEBC H.G.-01 (Total-09).=

8.

After completion of physical measurement, physical

efficiency test, written test as well as personality test, a merit

list was published in alphabetical order of the names of

candidates for general information in which it was clearly

mentioned that the same was not a select list but only a

provisional list of marks secured by the candidates and it does

not confer any claim for appointment and, as such, the

petitioner and other candidates, who had appeared in the

written test and personality test, their names were published in

the merit list. Further, 10% of vacancies are to be reserved for

eligible Home Guards against their respective category and

since the petitioner belonged to SEBC category, as per the

instructions, 11.25% of the total vacancy, i.e., 11 posts were

reserved for SEBC category and out of 11 posts, 10% of the

said category, is only one post which