Jayananda Behera vs State Of Odisha And Others

This matter is taken up through Hybrid mode.

The appellant, in the present intra-Court appeal, has put to challenge the order dated 29.11.2023 passed in W.P.(C) No.33425 of 2023. The petitioner in the said case has been impleaded as Respondent No.5 herein.

The dispute relates to deployment of Cluster Resource Center Coordinator (CRCC), Humma in the district of Ganjam. The appellant’s deployment was challenged in the said writ proceedings by Respondent No.5. After having dealt with the controversy, the learned Single Judge allowed the writ petition with the following observations:

“10. Having heard learned counsel appearing for the Parties and after going through the materials available on record, this Court finds that in terms of the selection process initiated under Annexure-1, both the Petitioner and private Opp. Party No. 5 were directed to take part in the counseling process fixed to 08.08.2023 at 10 a.m.. As found from the record since Opp. Party No. 5 could not take part in the counseling on the date fixed, Petitioner was deployed as CRCC in Humma Cluster vide order dtd.14.08.2023 under Annexure-4 and she submitted her joining in terms of the said order on 19.08.2023 under Annexure-5. However, basing on the order passed by this Court in W.P.(C) No. 26210 of 2023, Opp. Party No. 2 though was allowed to consider the grievance of Opp. Party No. 5 so made in his representation vide Annexure-8 to the writ petition, but this Court finds that Opp. Party No. 2 while considering the claim of Opp. Party No. 5 has not taken into consideration the plea raised by the Petitioner regarding non-participation of Opp. Party No. 5 in the counseling in terms of Annexure-3.

10.1. In view of such lacunae on the part of Opp. Party No. 2, which is apparent on the face of the impugned order, this Court is inclined to quash the order dtd.06.10.2023 so passed by the Opp. Party No. 2 under Annexure-7 series. While quashing the same, this Court is of the view that since deployment as CRCC is not a vested right either of the Petitioner or of Opp. Party No. 5, this Court while disposing the writ petition, directs Opp. Party No. 2 to go for fresh selection of CRCC in respect of Humma Cluster once again and complete the selection process in accordance with law, in which case this Court expresses no opinion.”

Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the appellant while assailing the impugned order of the learned Single Judge has not disputed the legal position that deployment as CRCC is not a vested right either of this appellant or the respondent No.5. Further, the learned Single Judge, while disposing of the writ petition has issued a clear direction to opposite party No.2 to conduct a fresh selection process in respect of the said Humma Cluster and complete the same in accordance with law.

Such being the situation, we are not inclined to interfere with the impugned order which suffers from no legal infirmity. Learned counsel for the appellant has submitted that till date, no selection process has been initiated for the deployment. It is observed that if no selection process has been initiated despite the observation made by the learned Single Judge, the authority shall be under obligation to initiate within a period of two months from today.

It goes without saying that the parties to the present proceedings i.e. the appellant and the respondent No.5 shall have liberty to participate in the said selection process, if not initiated.

The writ appeal stands disposed of with the above observations.

....……………………………