Orissa High Court
Bikram Jena & Others vs State Of Odisha And Others on 16 January, 2015
Author: Biswajit Mohanty
Bench: Pradip Mohanty, Biswajit Mohanty
ORISSA HIGH COURT: CUTTACK
W.P(C) No.16911 of 2014
---------------
In the matter of an application under Articles 226 & 227 of the Constitution of
India.
Bikram Jena & others ......... Petitioners
-versus-
State of Odisha and others ......... Opposite Parties
For Petitioners : M/s. Himansu Sekhar Mishra,
A.K. Mishra, A.K. Tripathy &
K. Badhi.
For Opp. Parties : Mr. B.P. Pradhan, Addl. Government Advocate
(for opposite party no.1)
: M/s. Pradipta Kumar Mohanty,
D.N. Mohapatra, J. Mohanty,
P.K. Nayak, S.N. Dash &
A. Das.
(for opposite party no.2)
: M/s. U.C. Mishra, A. Mishra,
A. Bal, J.K. Mohapatra &
A. Khandol.
[for opposite party nos.4 to 6 (interveners)]
P R E S E N T:
THE HONOURABLE SHRI JUSTICE PRADIP MOHANTY
AND
THE HONOURABLE SHRI JUSTICE BISWAJIT MOHANTY
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Date of Judgment: 16.01.2015
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Biswajit Mohanty, J. This writ application has been filed by the petitioners with
the following prayer;
"The petitioners above named, therefore, pray that in the
facts and circumstances of the case stated above, this Hon'ble
Court may be pleased to admit the writ petition, call for the entire
connected records from the opposite party no.2 relating to the
Odisha Civil Services Preliminary Examination held in pursuance
to Advertisement No.5 of 2011-12 and after hearing the parties,
this Hon'ble Court may be pleased to allow the application and
2
quash the second part of the impugned order under Annexure-2
directing to opposite party no.2 to calculate marks of candidates
by eliminating the faulty questions and negative marking and the
marks to be prorated to full mark and thereafter to prepare select
list of the candidates for the Main Examination by issuing
appropriate writ or writs, particularly writ of certiorari and allow
the writ petition with exemplary cost and damages to be paid to
the petitioners by opposite party no.2 and any other order or
direction considered fit and proper in favour of the petitioners."
2. The petitioners had filed P.P. No.54(C) of 2014 before the Odisha
Administrative Tribunal, Cuttack Bench, Cuttack on 9.7.2014. In the said
P.P. on 12.8.2014, the following order was passed;
"5. 12.8.2014 Heard Mr. H.S. Mishra, ld. counsel for
the applicant, Mr. H.K. Panigrahi, ld. Addl. Standing Counsel and
Mr. S.B. Jena, ld. counsel for the OPSC.
As prayed for by the ld. counsel for the OPSC, list this case
on 20.8.2014 along with O.A. No.2146(C)/2014.
(B.K. Dash) (Dr. S.N. Dash)
Member (J) Acting Chairman."
3. On 20.8.2014 vide order no.3 the said P.P. was disposed of and
directed to be registered as O.A. Accordingly, the same was registered as
O.A. No.2555(C) of 2014. Thereafter, vide order no.4 on the same date, i.e.,
20.8.2014, the following order was passed by the leaned Tribunal in O.A.
No.2555(C) of 2014;
"4. 20.8.2014 O.A. No.2555(C)/2014
The applicants, who have appeared in the Odisha Civil
Services Preliminary Examination pursuant to advertisement
No.5 dated 2011-12 have filed this O.A. with a prayer to set
aside Notice No.1839/PSC dated 1.5.2014 published by the
respondent No.3 declaring the candidates therein to have been
provisionally qualified for admission to Odisha Civil Services
(Main) Examination (Annexure-5), so also quash the entire
process of examination like setting up questions with
preparation of model answers on the basis of observations and
comments received from the students and published. It has also
been prayed for a direction to freshly conduct the Odisha Civil
Services Preliminary Examination.
3
Heard Mr. H.K. Mishra, learned counsel for the applicants,
Mr. R.K. Dash, learned Government Advocate and Mr. S.B.
Jena, learned counsel for the OPSC.
In course of hearing on the question of admission, Mr. S.B.
Jena, learned counsel for OPSC submits that in a similar matter
i.e. O.A.2146(C)/2014 in which OPSC has filed counter hearing
has been closed and order reserved today. Since this O.A. is
similar to O.A.2146(C)/2014, without issuing notice the present
O.A. may be disposed of in terms of the order passed in
O.A.2146(C)/2014.
Mr. Mishra, leaned counsel has no objection to the above
submission made by the learned counsel appearing for the
OPSC.
Order reserved.
(Dr. S.N. Dash)
Acting Chairman."
Accordingly, on 26.8.2014, O.A. No.2555(C) of 2014 was disposed of in
terms of the order passed in O.A. No.2146(C) of 2014.
4. As quoted earlier, in this writ application, the only prayer of the
petitioners is to quash the second part of the impugned order directing
opposite party no.2 to calculate the marks of candidates by eliminating the
faulty questions and negative markings and the marks to be prorated to full
marks and thereafter to prepare a select list of candidates for the Main
Examination.
5. Heard Mr. H.S. Mishra, learned counsel for the petitioners, Mr. B.P.
Pradhan, learned Additional Government Advocate for the State, Mr.
Pradipta Kumar Mohanty, learned Senior Advocate for the OPSC and Mr.
U.C. Mishra, learned counsel for opposite party nos.4 to 6 (intervenors).
6. Mr. H.S. Mishra pointed out that against the order passed in O.A.
No.2555(C) of 2014, the OPSC has not filed any writ application. Mr.
Mohanty, appearing for the OPSC submitted that O.A. No.2555(C) of 2014
4
has been disposed of only by "quoting" the entire order passed in O.A.
No.2146(C) of 2014. So in case W.P.(C) No.16601 of 2014 would be allowed
setting aside the order passed in O.A. No.2146(C) of 2014, then the order
passed in O.A. No.2555(C) of 2014 would be rendered infructuous. Mr. U.C.
Mishra supported the contentions of the petitioners.
Since we have already allowed W.P.(C) No.16601 of 2014 and set aside
the entire order dated 26.8.2014 passed in O.A. No.2146(C) of 2014; in such
background both parts of direction contained in order dated 26.8.2014
passed in O.A. No.2555(C) of 2014 no more survive. In this context, we
place our reliance on the case of Director of Settlements, A.P. and others
v. M.R. Apparao and another as reported in (2002) 4 SCC 638. As a
consequence O.A. No.2555(C) of 2014 is required to be adjudicated afresh
keeping in mind the contentions raised therein. Accordingly, we so direct.
However, while adjudicating O.A. No.2555(C) of 2014, learned Tribunal is
requested to keep in mind the observations made by us while disposing of
W.P.(C) No.16601 of 2014.
The writ application is accordingly disposed of.
LCR be sent back forthwith.
..................................
BISWAJIT MOHANTY, J.
Pradip Mohanty, J.I agree.
.................................. PRADIP MOHANTY High Court of Orissa, Cuttack Dated day of January, 2015/amit 5