Orissa High Court
Monalisha Das vs State Of Orissa & Others .... Opposite ... on 15 May, 2023
Author: V. Narasingh
Bench: V. Narasingh
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK
W.P.(C) NO.28070 of 2013
In the matter of an application under Article 226 & 227 of the
Constitution of India.
------------------
Monalisha Das .... Petitioner
-versus-
State of Orissa & Others .... Opposite Parties
For Petitioner : Mr. R. Mohanty, Advocate
For Opposite Parties : Mr. S.N. Pattnaik, AGA
CORAM:
JUSTICE V. NARASINGH
DATE OF HEARING : 15.05.2023
DATE OF JUDGMENT: 15.05.2023
V. Narasingh, J.
1. Heard Mr. R. Mohanty, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. S. N. Pattnaik, learned AGA for the Opposite Parties.
2. It is submitted by the learned counsel that the petitioner after going through the rigors of selection was appointed as a Data Entry Operator of Child Welfare Committee, Gajapati, W.P.(C) No.28070 of 2013 Page 1 of 4 Paralakhemundi on 02.01.2013. (Annexure-3, page-18 of Writ Petition)
3. While she was continuing as such, an advertisement was published by the Office of the Collector, Gajapati, District Child Protection Unit (Social Welfare Section) dated 26.11.2013 at Annexure-4 (P-19) for post of different categories including that of Assistant-cum-Data Entry Operator and assailing such advertisement, the petitioner preferred this Writ Petition when her representations dated 29.11.2013 address to the Director, Women & Child Development Department, Government of Odisha and Collector, Gajapati (Annexure-5) did not yield any result and she was intimated by the District Social Welfare Officer, Gajapati to participate in the recruitment process in terms of the advertisement.
4. Counter affidavit has been on behalf of the Opposite Party Nos.2 & 3(Collector and District Magistrate, Gajapati and District Social Welfare Officer, Gajapati) in which a specific stand has been taken that the petitioner's appointment is illegal and without approval of the District Selection Committee under the Chairmanship of the Collector, Gajapati.
5. Paragraph-8 of the counter affidavit to the said effect is quoted hereunder:-
x x x x "Para-8:-That the deponent humbly submits that the appointment of the petitioner is illegal, without the approval of the District Selection Committee under Chairperson of the Collector, Gajapati. So also the appointment letter issued by the Chairperson is not in accordance with the formal/instruction issued by the Government from time to time and against the Letter W.P.(C) No.28070 of 2013 Page 2 of 4 No.129/OSCPS-37/2011, dated 16.12.2011 and Letter No.17136/WCD/OSCPSC-37/11 dated 27.08.2013 issued by Director, OSCPS and Director, Social Welfare and Ex-Officio Additional Secretary to Government respectively.
x x x x
6. Such stand has been controverted in the rejoinder affidavit.
7. While issuing notice, this Court by order dated 08.01.2014 in Misc. Case No.24908 of 2013 passed the following interim order.
` "As an interim measure, this Court directs that the selection process for engagement of Assistant-cum-Data Entry Operator (ADEO) under Child Welfare Committee, Gajapati on contractual basis in pursuance of advertisement dated 26.11.2013 under Annexure-4 shall continue but no engagement order shall be issued without leave of this Court.
A free copy of this order be supplied to learned Addl. Government Advocate for onward communication."
8. During the pendency of the Writ Petition, the Opposite Parties have issued an order, which is on record at Annexure-2 to I.A. No.6805 of 2023, by which the petitioner's services have been terminated from the post of Assistant-cum-Date Entry Operator (ADEO) of CWC, Gajapati with effect from 04.05.2023.
9. It is the submission of the learned counsel for the State that in view of such order, the Writ Petition in its present form is no longer maintainable since the services of the petitioner has W.P.(C) No.28070 of 2013 Page 3 of 4 been terminated and the basis of challenge of the advertisement no longer subsists and it is asserted by Mr. Pattnaik, learned AGA for the State that in the present scenario, no relief can be granted at the behest of the petitioner, assailing the advertisement.
10. Per contra, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that ex facie the act of the Opposite Parties is contemptuous inasmuch as referring to the interim order quoted hereinabove, it is submitted that this Court in effect had protected her services.
11. On a conspectus of materials on record and on consideration of rival submissions, this Court is of the view that the Writ Petition in its present form is no longer maintainable in view of the order of termination passed at Annexure-2 to I.A. No.6805 of 2023.
12. Hence, this Court is not inclined to entertain this Writ Petition.
13. Leave is granted to the petitioner to assail the termination order raising all the grounds available to her including that during the pendency of the Writ Petition, the termination order could not have been passed.
14. With such observation, the Writ Petition is disposed of.
15. All interim orders are vacated.
(V. Narasingh) Judge Orissa High Court, Cuttack, Signature Not Verified Dated the, 15th May, 2023/Ayesha Digitally Signed Signed by: AYESHA ROUT Designation: Junior Stenographer Reason: Authentication Location: High Court of Orissa Date: 16-May-2023 19:38:48 W.P.(C) No.28070 of 2013 Page 4 of 4