Orissa High Court
Kamala Kanta Podha vs State Of Odisha & Ors. ..... Opp. Parties on 28 July, 2021
Author: B.R. Sarangi
Bench: B.R. Sarangi
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK
WP(C) No. 14800 of 2015
Kamala Kanta Podha ..... Petitioner
Mr. Abhiram Swain, Advocate
- Versus-
State of Odisha & Ors. ..... Opp. Parties
Mr. A.K. Sharma,
Addl. Govt. Advocate for State OPs
Mr. A.K. Mishra, Advocate for OP
No.4
CORAM:
DR. JUSTICE B.R. SARANGI
ORDER
28.07.2021 Order No. This matter is taken up through video conferencing mode.
04Heard Mr. Abhiram Swain, learned counsel for the petitioner, Mr. A.K. Sharma, learned Addl. Government Advocate for State opposite parties and Mr. A.K. Mishra, learned counsel for opposite party no.4.
The petitioner, by means of this writ petition, seeks direction to the opposite parties to engage him as Community Professional in respect of Gardingea Grama Panchayat under Tikabali Block in the district of Kandhamal taking into consideration is past experience as Community Organizer, by quashing Annexure-8, the order dated 24.06.2015 passed by the Collector and District Magistrate, Kandhamal rejecting the representation filed by the petitioner.
Mr. A. Swain, learned counsel for the petitioner contended that pursuant to the advertisement issued, the petitioner submitted his application for engagement as Community Professional taking into consideration his experience as Community Organizer. As his case was not duly considered, the petitioner made grievance before the authority concerned to give 2 him engagement as Community Professional by filing a representation. As no action was taken by the authority concerned, the petitioner filed W.P.(C) No. 7829 of 2014, which was disposed of by this Court vide order dated 22.04.2014 directing to dispose of the representation filed by the petitioner. In compliance thereof, the Collector and District Magistrate, Kandhamal, by order dated 24.06.2015 under Annexure-8, has considered and rejected the representation of the petitioner.
Mr. A.K. Mishra, learned counsel for opposite party no.4 contended that so far as change of conditions stipulated in the advertisement itself is concerned, the same cannot be done by this Court and that is completely prerogative of the authority who has issued the advertisement for engagement as Community Professional. More so, the grievance of the petitioner having been considered, a reasoned order has been passed by the Collector and District Magistrate, Kandhamal in Annexure-8. Therefore, the same may not be interfered with. Accordingly, he seeks for dismissal of the writ petition.
Having heard learned counsel for the parties and after going through the record, it appears that the petitioner has filed this writ petition seeking engagement as Community Professional, pursuant to the advertisement issued by the Orissa Livelihood Mission. It is contended that the petitioner has got experience as Community Organizer and thereby his experience should be taken into consideration for giving engagement as Community Professional. As his case was not considered, he filed representation before the authority concerned and the same having not attended to, he approached this Court by filing W.P.(C) No. 7829 of 2014, wherein this Court, vide order dated 22.04.2014, directed to consider his representation and the Collector and District Magistrate, Kandhamal has considered and 3 rejected the same by Annexure-8.
As it appears, the State Mission Director, Odisha Livelihoods Mission, Panchayati Raj Department, Govt. of Odisha issued instructions vide circular no. 1983/13 dated 19.09.2013 for implementation of Intensive Block Strategy in Balliguda, Chakapad and Daringbadi Block where Community Professionals were to be appointed. The State Mission Director-Cum-CEO, Odisha Livelihoods Mission, Panchayati Raj Department issued detailed guidelines, vide letter no. 2613/13 dated 30.11.2013 for selection of Community Professional (CP) in all Grama Panchayats of Intensive Blocks, i.e., Balliguda, Chakapad and Daringbadi of Kandhamal district. Accordingly, the Collector & District Magistrate, Kandhamal instructed the concerned Block Development Officers to carry out and facilitate to GPLF/BLF in selection of Community Professional (CP) in respective Grama Panchayats, vide letter no. 8401 dated 23.12.2013. As per such guidelines, the Collector & District Magistrate is not the authority for giving engagement to Community Professional. In paragraphs 5 and 6 of the order dated 24.06.2015, the Collector and District Magistrate, Kandhamal has observed as follows:-
"5. That, in the aforesaid guidelines, the selection of Community Professional (CP) is the primary responsibility of the Community Level Federations like the Gram Panchayat Level Federation (GPLF)/Block Level Federation (BLF) which is constituted by Women Self Help Groups (WSHGs). A candidate who desires to be engaged as a Community Professional (CP) has to apply to the respective GPLF/BLF having eligibility norms fixed by Govt. and to face the selection process for engagement as Community Professional (CP). As such, the Collector and District Magistrate, Kandhamal is not the authority for engagement of Community Professional (CP).
6. Moreover, no engagement of Community Professionals in all the three notified intensive blocks i.e. Balliguda, Chakapad and Daringbadi has so far been made. However, since the guidelines of the government regarding selection of Community Professional is very clear and as the petitioner does not come within the eligibility criteria prescribed by the government, the prayer of Sri 4 Kamala Kanta Podha is hereby rejected."
In view of such position, this Court does not find any illegality or irregularity in the order dated 24.06.2015 passed by the Collector and District Magistrate, Kandhamal and, as such, the writ petition merits no consideration and the same stands dismissed.
As the restrictions due to resurgence of COVID-19 situation are continuing, learned counsel for the parties may utilize a printout of the order available in the High Court's website, at par with certified copy, subject to attestation by the concerned advocate, in the manner prescribed vide Court's Notice No.4587, dated 25th March, 2020 as modified by Court's Notice No. 4798 dated 15th April, 2021.
(DR. B.R. SARANGI) GDS JUDGE 5 6