Page 1 of 28

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK

W.P.(C) No.23909 of 2024

An application filed under Articles 226 and 227 of the

Constitution of India.

Arobinda Biswal and another ..... Petitioners

-versus-

State of Odisha and others ..... Opposite Parties

Advocate(s) appeared in this case:-

--------------------------------------------------------------------------

For Petitioners … Mr. B.S. Tripathy(1),

Senior Advocate

Assisted by Mr. A. Tripathy

& Mr. A. Sahoo, Advocates

For Opposite Parties … Mr. D.K. Sahu, A.G.A.

(For O.P. Nos.1 to 3)

M/s. Pabitra Kumar Nayak,

H.B. Dash, K.K. Jena,

S.K. Samal

(For O.P. Nos.4 to 9)

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

CORAM:

THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ADITYA KUMAR MOHAPATRA

_____________________________________________________

Date of Hearing : 13.03.2026 :: Date of Judgment: 25.06.2026

______________________________________________________

Aditya Kumar Mohapatra, J. :

1. The Petitioners, who are working as Group-D employees

under Jagatsinghpur District, have approached this Court by filing

the present writ petition with a prayer for a declaration that the

Page 2 of 28

DPC proceeding held on 05.04.2023 with consequential promotion

orders issued in favour of the private-Opposite Party Nos.4 to 6 by

Office Order at Annexure-9 series and the DPC proceeding held

on 05.04.2023 with consequential promotion orders given to

private-Opposite Party Nos.7 to 9 at Annexure-10 are bad, illegal

and void ab initio. A further prayer has also been made for a

direction to the Opposite Party Nos.1 to 3 to first recast the

vacancy positions as indicated in Annexure-5 as on 24.11.2022 in

terms of the order passed in the previous writ petition bearing

WP(C) No.33857 of 2022 dated 13.12.2022 at Annexure-7 and to

reconsider the case of the promotion of Group-D employees of

Jagatsinghpur Education District as against 20% quota for

promotion to the post of Junior Assistant (Group-C) from Group-D

posts, as was introduced by way of an amendment vide Resolution

dated 24.11.2022 to the OMS Rules, 2019. The Petitioners have

also prayed for a direction to the Opposite Parties to give them

promotion to the post of Junior Assistant with retrospective effect

as has been done in the case of Opposite Party Nos.4 to 6 and 7 to

9.

2. The factual background of the Petitioners’ case leading to

filing of the present writ petition, in a nutshell, is that initially the

Page 3 of 28

Petitioners were duly appointed against Group-D posts in the

Education District of Jagatsinghpur. While the Petitioners were

discharging their duties as Group-D employees in the above-noted

Education District, the Government of Odisha promulgated the

‘Odisha Ministerial Service (Method of Recruitment and

Conditions of Service of Junior Assistants, Senior Assistants and

Section Officers in the District Offices and offices Sub-ordinate

thereto) Rules, 2019’ (hereinafter referred to as “OMS Rules,

2019”). The OMS Rules, 2019 was notified on 08.03.2019 therein

providing a window for the Group-D employees for promotion to

the post of Junior Assistant (Group-C). As per the provision

contained in Rule 8, a 10% of total vacancy in the post of Junior

Assistant in the office of the District Offices and offices sub-

ordinate thereto were reserved for Group-D employees of the

District Offices of the concerned district, which was then to be

filled up on the basis of the recommendation of the Departmental

Promotion Committee (DPC) constituted under sub-rule 1 of Rule

11.

3. While the matter stood thus, the Government of Odisha, by

way of an amendment vide resolution dated 24.11.2022 by the GA

& PG Department, Government of Odisha, at Annexure-4 to the

Page 4 of 28

writ petition, enhanced the existing quota of 10% of Junior

Assistant (Group-C) posts reserved for Group-D employees to

20%. However, all other provisions of the OMS Rules, 2019 were

kept intact. The aforesaid resolution dated 24.11.2022 was

published in the Gazette Notification thereby amending the rules

as per the Notification dated 07.01.2023 at Annexure-A/4 to the

counter affidavit filed by the private-Opposite Party Nos.4 to 9.

4. On a careful scrutiny of the writ petition it is further

revealed that after the resolution was published on 24.11.2022, the

Director, Secondary Education, Odisha issued a letter to the

Odisha Sub-Ordinate Staff Selection Commission with a

requisition for selection of 2,333 number of Junior Assistant posts

in Government Secondary Schools, office of the BEOS and DEOS

under the S&ME Department. A breakup of the posts in a tabular

form has been appended to the letter dated 25.11.2022 at

Annexure-5. The tabulation gives a clear picture of the entire

vacancy in different districts of the State of Odisha. On

26.12.2022, the Joint Director of the office of the Directorate of

Secondary Education, Odisha issued a circular letter to all DEOs in

the State in the context of filing of the requisition/ revised

requisition for selection of Junior Assistant posts in Government

Page 5 of 28

Secondary Schools, office of BEOs and DEOs under the S&ME

Department. The aforesaid letter clearly reveals that the

promotional quota for Group-D employees has been enhanced

from 10% to 20%. As such, the Petitioners have asserted that by

the time such requisition was issued by the Government of Odisha,

the aforesaid amendment to the extent of enhancing the reservation

of posts for Group-D employees in Junior Assistant (Group-C)

posts was enhanced to 20%.

5. The decision of the Government vide letters dated

25.11.2022, 29.11.2022 and 02.12.2022 was challenged before this

Court by some of the aggrieved parties by filing W.P.(C)

No.33857 of 2022. The principal ground taken therein was that

such letters are contrary to the Resolution of the Government dated

24.11.2022, which has been annexed to the present writ petition as

Annexure-4. Further, a prayer was also made for a direction to the

Opposite Parties to recast the category-wise break-up of vacancies

of base-level posts of Junior Assistant in the office of the

Government Secondary Schools, DEOs and BEOS by taking into

consideration 20% of the total vacancies reserved for promotion

from Group-D category. A coordinate bench of this court vide

order dated 13.12.2022, after taking into consideration the

Page 6 of 28

Resolution dated 24.11.2022, allowed the writ petition keeping in

view the enhancement of the posts of Junior Assistant reserved for

the category of Group-D employees and, accordingly, the letters

under Annexures-8, 9 and 10 of that writ petition were quashed.

Further, the matter was remitted back to the Opposite Party No.2,

i.e., Director Secondary Education, Odisha, Bhubaneswar, to

recast the list of vacancies of base-level posts of Junior Assistant

in terms of the Resolution dated 24.11.2022 at Annexure-4 to the

present writ petition.

6. While this was the position, a DPC meeting was convened

in respect of the Jagatsinghpur Education District and was held on

05.04.2023. A copy of the minutes of the proceedings held on

05.04.2023 has been filed along with the present writ petition as

Annexure-9. A perusal of the minutes of the proceeding reveals

that the DPC was constituted under the Chairmanship of the

District Education Officer, Jagatsinghpur, and four other members.

The Petitioners have challenged the constitution of such committee

on the ground that it is not conformity with Rule 11 of the OMS

Rules, 2019. Moreover, the minutes of the proceeding dated

05.04.2023 reveals that the District Education Officer has

informed that out of the 42 Junior Assistant posts which are lying

Page 7 of 28

vacant during the month of September 2022, 10% of vacancies,

i.e., 4 Junior Assistant posts, are filled up by way of promotion, as

laid down by the Government in its notification dated 08.03.2019,

on the basis of the seniority, amongst the 7 candidates that found

place in the eligible list.

7. Consequent upon such decision of the DPC, the Opposite

Party Nos.4, 5 and 6 were given promotion to the post of Junior

Assistant as per Annexure-9 series. On perusal of later proceeding

of the meeting dated 28.02.2024 it is revealed that in the said

meeting, 20% reserved vacancy in the post of Junior Assistant for

Group-D employees was taken into consideration and the

committee decided to fill up three posts, ignoring the reservation in

vacancy as has been provided in Rule-8 and subsequently amended

vide Resolution dated 24.11.2022. As per the recommendation of

the second DPC which was presided over by the Collector, names

of three persons were recommended and they were given

promotion to the post of Junior Assistant who are Opposite Party

Nos.7, 8 and 9 to the present writ petition.

8. Heard Mr. B.S. Tripathy, learned Senior Counsel

appearing for the Petitioners as well as learned Additional

Government Advocate for the State-Opposite Parties and Mr. S.K.

Page 8 of 28

Samal, learned counsel appearing for the private-Opposite Party

Nos.4 to 6 and 7 to 9. Perused the pleadings of the respective

parties as well as documents available on record.

9. Mr. B.S. Tripathy, learned Senior Counsel appearing for

the Petitioners, at the outset contended that both the DPCs held on

05.04.2023 as well as on 28.02.2024 are illegal, inasmuch as they

have not been carried out in terms of the OMS Rules, 2019 and the

consequential amendment of the Rules, 2019 vide Resolution

dated 24.11.2022. He further submitted that the Opposite Parties

without first complying with the order passed by the coordinate

bench on 13.12.2022 in WP(C) No.33857 of 2022 at Annexure-7,

have proceeded with the selection of the candidates for promotion

to the post of Junior Assistant from among the Group-D

employees of the district office. Mr. Tripathy, learned Senior

Counsel for the Petitioners further contended that initially the

OMS Rules, 2019 in Rule-8 provided for reservation of 10% of the

seat of Junior Assistant (Group-C) posts for promotion from

among the Group-D staff of the District Education Office

including the schools. However, the same was subsequently

amended by way of a Resolution dated 24.11.2022 which was also

duly published in the Official Gazette on 07.01.2023 as per

Page 9 of 28

Annexure-A/4 to the counter affidavit of Opposite Party Nos.4 to

9.

10. In course of his argument, learned Senior Counsel

appearing for the Petitioners further contended that although the

share of the posts for Group-D employees in the post of Junior

Assistant, which is a promotional post, was enhanced from 10% to

20%, however, the breakup list of the district-level Group-D staffs

were not amended as per the direction of the coordinate bench of

this court vide order dated 13.12.2022. He further contended that

without first carrying out the exercise of revising or recasting the

list providing breakup of the Group-D staffs of the district, the

DPC proceeded with the selection of the candidate for promotion

to the post of Junior Assistant. He further argued that the first DPC

which was convened on 05.04.2023 was not constituted in terms of

Rule-11 of the OMS Rules, 2019. In the aforesaid context, learned

Senior Counsel for the Petitioners referred to the proceedings of

the meeting held on 05.04.2023 as well as on 28.02.2024. So far

the meeting held on 05.04.2023 is concerned, it appears that the

same was presided over by the DEO, Jagatsinghpur whereas the

meeting that was held on 28.02.2024 was presided over by the

Collector, Jagatsinghpur. Thus, learned Senior Counsel for the

Page 10 of 28

Petitioners contended that the constitution of the DPC and the

meeting of which was held on 05.04.2023 and recommended the

names of Opposite Party Nos.4 to 6, was illegally constituted.

Therefore, the recommendation of such committee is a nullity in

the eyes of law.

11. With regard to the recommendation made by the second

DPC on 28.02.2024, learned Senior Counsel for the Petitioners

contended that although the committee was constituted in terms of

Rule-11 of the OMS Rules, 2019, however, such committee has

not carried out the selection as is required under the Rules. In the

aforesaid context, he further submitted that before convening the

DPC meeting on 28.02.2024, neither the vacancy position was

ascertained nor the posts which were kept reserved for the Group-

D Staff in the post of Junior Assistant, as is provided under Rule-8

of the OMS Rules, 2019, were determined and notified. The DPC,

which was convened on 28.02.2024, was convened abruptly and

they picked up some names randomly and they have given

promotion to the Opposite Party Nos.7 to 9. On the aforesaid

grounds, the learned Senior Counsels appearing for the Petitioners

contended that the both the DPCs proceeded on the breakup list

that was prepared prior to the year 2022 and which was

Page 11 of 28

specifically quashed by the learned coordinate bench vide its order

dated 13.12.2022 passed in WPC No.33857 of 2022. On such

grounds, the learned Senior Counsel for the Petitioners contended

that the selection of the Opposite Party Nos.4 to 6 and 7 to 9 are

absolutely illegal and void in the eyes of law.

12. Learned counsel appearing for the Opposite Party Nos.4 to

6 and 7 to 9, on the other hand, supported the action of the

Opposite Parties in convening the DPC meeting both on

05.04.2023 as well as on 28.02.2024. In course of his argument,

learned counsel for the Opposite Party Nos.4 to 9 submitted before

this court that the private-opposite parties appeared in the

recruitment test and they came out successful in the skill test that

was conducted by the Opposite Parties. He further asserted that the

private-opposite parties are senior and experienced and that they

have been selected on the basis of their performance in the skill

test as well as on the basis of their seniority and experience. Upon

such grounds, learned counsel for the private-opposite parties

contended before this court that the opposite parties have not

committed any illegality in selecting and giving promotion to the

private-Opposite Party Nos.4 to 6 and 7 to 9.

Page 12 of 28

13. Further, referring to the minutes of the proceeding dated

28.02.2024 at Annexure-10 series to the writ petition, learned

counsel for the Petitioner, drawing attention of this court to the

portion of such minutes of the meeting where the DPC has dealt

with the reservation of posts for the Group-D employees, stated

before this Court that such issue has been specifically dealt with in

terms of the letter dated 28.12.2018 of the Revenue & Disaster

Management Department, Government of Odisha, and further

referring to the proviso to Section-4 of the ORV Act, 1975, the

committee has held that there shall be no reservation in the

vacancies to be filled-up by promotion where there is element of

direct recruitment in the grade or cadre, in which the vacancies

have occurred, is more than sixty-six and two-third per cent. This

Court, on a careful consideration of the aforesaid paragraph, found

that the ORV Act has been quoted out of the context and in an

incorrect manner.

14. Moreover, such paragraph does not convey any definite

sense. Ultimately, the committee has held that no reservation

principle is applicable while promoting Group-D employees to the

post of Junior Clerk. This Court further observes that although the

issue was with regard to promotion to the post of Junior Assistant,

Page 13 of 28

however, the committee has come to a conclusion that no

reservation would be applicable to the post of Junior Clerk while

promoting Group-D employees. In any event, learned Counsel for

the Private-Opposite Parties, referring to the aforesaid analysis

made by the DPC in its meeting held on 28.02.2024, made an

attempt to support the promotion given to the private-Opposite

Parties Nos.7 to 9, and further contended that since such

appointment has been made by a duly constituted committee in

terms of Rule-11 of the OMS Rules, 2019, it cannot be held that

the recommendation is illegal or void. On such ground, learned

counsel for the private-opposite parties Nos.4 to 6 and 7 to 9

prayed for dismissal of the writ petition.

15. Mr. D.K. Sahu, learned Additional Government Advocate

appearing on behalf of the State-Opposite Parties, referred to the

counter affidavit filed by the District Education Officer, Opposite

Party No.3. By referring to the counter affidavit, learned

Additional Government Advocate, while supporting the conduct of

the Opposite Parties in selecting and giving promotion to the

private-Opposite Party Nos.4 to 6 and 7 to 9, at the outset

contended that the Opposite Parties have not committed any

illegality or violated the provisions of the rule. In the course of his

Page 14 of 28

argument, learned Additional Government Advocate drew the

attention of this Court to various paragraphs of the counter

affidavit, made an attempt to convince this Court with regard to

the legality and validity of both the proceedings held on

05.04.2023 as well as on 28.02.2024.

16. On perusal of the para-8 of the counter affidavit, it appears

that Opposite Parties have defended the conduct of the DPC that

took place on 05.04.2023 and which had taken into consideration

10% of the vacancies in the post of Junior Assistant while giving

promotion to the Group-D employees. The learned Additional

Government Advocate, by referring to paragraph-8 of the counter

affidavit, tried to justify the conduct of the Opposite Parties by

saying that earlier the 10% vacancy was filled up. However, in

view of the latest amendment by virtue of the Resolution dated

24.11.2022, the rest of the 10% vacancy were to be filled up, and

accordingly, the DPC in its meeting held on 05.04.2023 considered

the case of the balance 10% candidates of the previous years.

Consequently, on the basis of merit of the Opposite Party Nos.4 to

6, they were duly selected and have been given appointment.

17. So far the claim of the present Petitioners is concerned, the

learned Additional Government Advocate emphatically argued

Page 15 of 28

that although the Petitioners participated in the selection process,

however, they were not found suitable for the post. Accordingly,

their cases were not considered by the DPC. He further contended

that the Petitioners, having participated in the recruitment process,

are estopped from challenging the same after they were not

selected by the DPC for promotion to the post of Junior Assistant.

On the aforesaid ground, learned Additional Government

Advocate contented before this Court that the Opposite Parties

have not committed any illegality. As such, the DPC meetings held

on 05.04.2023 as well as on 28.02.2024 were in accordance with

the rules and that no fault can be found with the DPC

recommending the names of the private-Opposite Party Nos.4 to 6

and 7 to 9. In such view of the matter, learned Additional

Government Advocate contented that the present writ petition is

devoid of merit, and, as such, is liable to be dismissed.

18. Having heard the learned counsels appearing for the

respective parties and on a careful consideration of their

submissions, pleadings as well as the documents annexed to the

present writ petition, this Court observes that the issue involved in

the present writ petition is with regard to the validity of the DPC

proceedings held on 05.04.2023 and 28.02.2024, as well as the

Page 16 of 28

recommendation of such DPC and consequential promotion given

to the private-Opposite Party Nos.4 to 6 and 7 to 9 to the post of

Junior Assistant from among the Group-D employees of the

District Education Offices. To answer the aforesaid question, this

Court is required to test the validity of both the DPC meetings

which were held on 05.04.2023 as well as on 28.02.2024.

19. On a close scrutiny of the OMS Rules, 2019, it appears

that originally the Rule was framed in the year 2019, thereby

providing 10% reservation in the post of Junior Assistant for the

employees belonging to the Group-D service who are working in

different Secondary Schools as well as in the office of the DEOs

and in the BEOs of the concerned district. Such promotion was to

be given by a DPC which was required to be constituted in terms

of Rule 11 of the aforesaid OMS Rules, 2019. However, the said

Rule was admittedly amended in the year 2022 by virtue of the

Government Resolution dated 24.11.2022, at Annexure-4 to the

writ petition, to the effect that the percentage of reservation was

altered and the same was enhanced from earlier 10% to 20%. The

other provisions of the OMS Rules, 2019 remained intact.

20. It would be apposite to mention here that after the Rules

were amended, some of the Group-D employees approached this

Page 17 of 28

court by filing a writ petition, as has been narrated in detail in the

preceding paragraphs. The learned coordinate bench vide order

dated 13.12.2022 disposed of the writ petition thereby quashing

the letters at Annexures-8, 9, and 10 of the said writ petition. On

perusal of order dated 13.12.2022, it appears that the learned

counsel appearing for the School and Mass Education Department

admitted before the coordinate bench that the list containing

breakup of the vacancies dated 25.11.2022, i.e. post 24.11.2022

when the Rule was amended, was not in conformity with the Rules

and that the same is contrary to the Resolution dated 24.11.2022.

21. On the basis of the aforesaid categorical admission of the

learned counsel for the State, the learned coordinate bench

proceeded with the adjudication of the writ petition and eventually

came to hold that the breakup of vacancies as indicated in the list

dated 25.11.2022 is not in conformity with the Resolution dated

24.11.2022 and that it doesn't reflect the correct vacancy position

as has been provided vide Resolution dated 24.11.2022. Finally,

the learned coordinate bench quashed the impugned breakup of

vacancy list dated 25.11.2022 and remanded the matter back to the

Director, Secondary Education, Odisha, to recast the breakup of

vacancy list of the base level posts of Junior Assistant in terms of

Page 18 of 28

the Resolution dated 24.11.2022. The Resolution dated

24.11.2022, as is evident from the counter affidavit filed by the

Opposite Party Nos.4 to 9, reveals that the same was published in

the Official Gazette of the Government of Odisha dated

09.01.2023, and the same has been annexed to the counter affidavit

of the Opposite Party Nos.4 to 9 as Annexure A/4.

22. This Court carefully examined the Gazette Notification at

Annexure A/4 to the counter affidavit of the Opposite Party Nos.4

to 9. On perusal of the said notification, it appears that a new Rule

was promulgated, which is called the ‘Odisha Ministerial Services

(Method of Recruitment and Conditions of Service of Junior

Assistant, Senior Assistant, and Section Officers in the District

Offices and Offices Sub-ordinate thereto) Amendment Rules,

2022’ (hereinafter “2022 Rules”). The 2022 Rules were

promulgated to further amend the OMS Rules, 2019 and provide

the manner and mode of selection of the candidates. The said

Rules further amended Rule 8 of the original OMS Rules, 2019,

thereby inserting a new sub-rule (2) and (3). However, such

amendment nowhere touched the 10% posts reserved in Junior

Assistant posts for the Group-D staffs. The amendment of the year

Page 19 of 28

2022 introduces a new appendix prescribing the scheme and

subject for the examination.

23. So far promotion from the Group-D post to Group-C post

is concerned, the original G.A. & P.G. Department Resolution

No.15059/Gen dated 29.07.2010 and Resolution dated No.13012

dated 04.06.2020 provided that the promotion quota of Group-D

employees in Group-C post in different cadres in the State shall

not be less than 10%. Obviously, such promotion shall be subject

to the concerned candidate fulfilling the eligibility criteria, such as

educational qualification and other qualification, including

knowledge in computer operation as has been prescribed in the

rules. Later on, it was observed by the State Government that very

few Group-D employees are getting opportunity for promotion to

Group-C post under the existing quota of 10%. The G.A. & P.G.

Department, Government of Odisha after a careful consideration

decided to raise the said promotion quota from 10% to 20% in

order to provide a wider scope for promotion of Group-D

employees to different Group-C posts in different cadres in the

State. This was approved vide Resolution dated 24.11.2022 at

Annexure-4 to the writ petition, a copy of which has also been

Page 20 of 28

attached to the counter affidavit filed on behalf of the State-

Opposite Party.

24. The enhancement of above noted quota for promotion to

Group-C post from 10% to 20% also gets support from the circular

letter of the Directorate of Secondary Education, Odisha,

Bhubaneswar dated 26.12.2022 at Annexure-6. The letter of the

Joint Director dated 26.12.2022 is quoted herein below:-

“DIRECTORATE OF SECONDARY EDUCATION, ODISHA, BHUBANE SWAR

No.2B-39/2018-II-32043//Dt. 26.12.22

To

All the District Education Officers of the State

Sub: Filing of requisition/revised requisition for selection

of Jr. Asst. posts in Govt. Secondary Schools, O/o.

BEOs, and DEOs under S&ME Dept.

Ref: This Directorate Letter No.29982 dt.29.11.2022

Madam/Sir,

In inviting a reference to the subject and letter cited

above, I am to say that you were requested vide this

directorate letter under reference to file requisition for filling

up of Jr. Asst. posts in Govt. Secondary Schools, O/o. BEOs,

and DEOs under S&ME Dept keeping 10% of the vacancy of

Jr. Asst. post for filling up by way of promotion of Group-D

employees. Now Govt. in GA Department vide their

Resolution No.33329/Gen., DT. 24.11.22 have enhanced the

promotion quota of Group-D employees from 10% to 20%.

Hence you are requested to file requisition/revi sed

requisition for selection of Jr. Asst. posts in Govt. Secondary

Schools, O/o. BEOs, and DEOs under S&ME Dept., keeping

20% of the vacancy of Jr. Asst. posts for filling up by way of

promotion of Group-D employees.

Yours faithfully,

Joint Director”

25. Despite Resolution of the G.A. & P.G. Department,

Government of Odihsa, dated 24.11.2022, some of the

Departments did not adhere to the provisions newly introduced by

Page 21 of 28

virtue of the aforesaid Resolution. Accordingly, some of the

Petitioners approached this Court by filing the W.P.(C) No.33857

of 2022. A Bench of this Court vide order dated 13.12.2022, while

testing the validity of letters dated 25.11.2022, 29.11.2022 and

02.12.2022, considered the aforesaid issue of the percentage of

reservation in Group-C post for the Group-D employees. The

learned Coordinate Bench, while upholding the enhancement of

reservation from 10% to 20%, in para-6 of the order, has observed

as follows:-

“Having heard the learned counsel for the

parties and after going through the records, this

Court is of the considered view that since the

Government, as a matter of principle, has decided

to enhance the promotion quota of Group-D

employees from 10% to 20% in order to provide

them wider scope for promotion to different

Group-C posts of Junior Assistant, the list of

break up vacancies in the base level posts of

Junior Assistant in the offices of DEO/BEO and

Govt. High Schools under Annexure-8 prescribing

10% vacancies for promotion from Group-D to

Group-C posts, cannot sustain in the eye of law

and, as such, the same is in gross violation of the

resolution dated 24.11.2022 under Annexure-7.

Thereby, the list of break up vacancies in the

posts of Junior Assistant in the offices of the

DEO/BEO and Govt. High Schools and approval

of the empowering committee thereof, vide

Annexures-8, 9 and 10, cannot sustain.

Accordingly, the same are hereby quashed. The

matter is remitted back to opposite party no.2-

Director, Secondary Education, Odisha,

Bhubaneswar to recast Annexure-8, the list of

Page 22 of 28

break up vacancies of the base level posts of

Junior Assistant in the offices of DEO/BEO and

Govt. High Schools in terms of the resolution

dated 24.11.2022 under Anexure-7 as

expeditiously as possible, preferably within a

period of four weeks from the date of

communication/production of this order.”

26. While this was the position, the confusion with regard to

the percentage of quota again arose in the year 2024. The District

Education Officer, Puri sought for a clarification from the

Directorate of Secondary Education, Odisha, Bhubaneswar. The

Directorate vide its letter No.22533 dated 09.08.2024 at Annexure-

11 to the writ petition, by referring to the Resolution

No.33329/Gen dated 24.11.2022, had issued clear instruction that

20% of vacant posts of Junior Assistant will be filled by way of

promotion from amongst the Group-D employees. The relevant

portion of the letter is quoted hereinbelow for better appreciation:-

“Govt. in GA Department vide their

Resolution No.33329/Gen. dated 24.11.22 have

decided that 20% of vacant post of Junior

Assistant will be filled by way of promotion of

Group-D employees.”

27. The aforesaid clarification of the Director leaves no room

for doubt that the Resolution dated 24.11.2022 has enhanced the

percentage of quota for Group-D employees for promotion to

Group-C post from 10% to 20%. Accordingly, all concerned were

Page 23 of 28

requested to take necessary steps for promotion of Group-D

employees to Junior Assistant post as per Resolution dated

24.11.2022 at Annexure-4 to the writ petition.

28. The argument advanced by Mr. B.S. Tripathy, learned

Senior Counsel appearing for the Petitioners emphatically

supporting the decision of the Government vide Resolution dated

24.11.2022 with regard to enhancement of the quota from 10% to

20% also gets support from the Gazette Notification dated 31

st

March, 2023. The G.A.&P.G. Department, Government of

Odisha, by virtue of the Gazette Notification dated 31

st

March,

2023 amended the Rules, 2019 by virtue of the Amended Rules,

2023. The copy of the Gazette Notification has also been filed as

Annexure-12 and the same has been attached to the rejoinder

affidavit filed by the Petitioners. On a careful scrutiny of the

Gazette Notification No.709 dated 31

st

March, 2023, this Court

observes that as per the amending Rule-2, the Rule-6(1) of the

existing Rules, 2019 was amended and the figure and expression

“90%” has been substituted by the figure and expression “80%”.

The impact of such amendment could be that the direct recruitment

to Group-C Junior Assistant post would be confined to 80%.

Similarly, the amending Rule-3 seeks to amend Rule-8(1) of the

Page 24 of 28

existing rule to the extent that the expression “10%” has been

substituted by “20%”. Since the rule was amended thereby

enhancing the percentage of quota for promotion from Group-D

post to Junior Assistant post in different cadres in the State of

Odisha by virtue of the Gazette Notification dated 31

st

March,

2023 at Annexure-12, such amendment enhancing the percentage

of quota would come into effect from the date of Notification in

the Odisha Gazette dated 31

st

March, 2023 i.e. the date on which

the 2019 Rule was amended thereby enhancing the percentage of

quota from 10% to 20%. In view of the aforesaid position, this

Court has no hesitation in coming to a conclusion that the

enhancement of the quota for recruitment to the post of Junior

Assistant from Group-D post shall be 20% w.e.f. 31

st

March, 2023

when the rule was amended incorporating such enhancement in the

reservation of such post.

29. The aforesaid finding of this Court with regard to

enhancement of the quota from 10% to 20% w.e.f. 31

st

March,

2023 also gets support from the order passed by the learned

Coordinate Bench on 13.12.2022 in W.P.(C) No.33857 of 2022

(Sanjib Kumar Singh & Ors. v. State of Odisha & Ors.). The

order dated 13.12.2022 further reveals that the impugned letters

Page 25 of 28

dated 25.11.2022, 29.11.2022 and 02.12.2022 were all quashed in

view of the fact that they are in gross violation of the Resolution

dated 24.11.2022. Finally, the learned Coordinate Bench remitted

the matter back to the Director, Secondary Education, Odisha to

recast the list of break-up of vacancies of the base level posts of

Junior Assistant in the offices of DEO/BEO and Govt. High

Schools in terms of the Resolution dated 24.11.2022. On perusal

of the record, it is further revealed that the decision of the

Coordinate Bench vide order dated 13.12.2022 was communicated

to all concerned by the Directorate.

30. Reverting back to the facts of the present writ petition, the

Petitioners, being aggrieved by the decision of the DPC held on

05.04.2023 giving consequential promotion to private Opposite

Party Nos.4 to 6 and the DPC held on 05.04.2023 giving

consequential promotion to private Opposite Party Nos.7 to 9,

have approached this Court with a prayer to quash the

recommendation of the DPC for promotion on the ground that the

same is contrary to the Resolution dated 24.11.2022 as well as the

Gazettee Notification dated 31.03.2023. On a careful

consideration of the submission made by the counsels representing

the respective parties, this Court is of the view that the argument

Page 26 of 28

advanced by the learned Senior Counsel appearing for the

Petitioners contains substance. Thus, the prayer made by

Petitioners in the present writ petition requires a thorough scrutiny

keeping in view the analysis made hereinabove by this Court.

31. In view of the detailed analysis made hereinabove and

further keeping in view the G.A.&P.G. Department Resolution

dated 24.11.2022 as well as the Gazette Notification dated

31.03.2023 which came into effect from 31.03.2023, this Court is

of the view that a total of 20% posts in Junior Assistant should

have been kept reserved and filled up from among the Group-D

employees subject to their satisfying the other eligibility criteria as

prescribed in the rules. Since the State-Opposite Parties have not

followed the original rules as well as the amendment thereof in the

year 2023, particularly in view of the amendment of the year 2023

which came into force w.e.f. 31.03.2023, this Court is of the

considered view that the State-Opposite Parties have not followed

the rules scrupulously while filling up the post of Junior Assistant

in different cadres in the State of Odisha.

32. In view of such analysis and finding, this Court has no

hesitation in quashing the recommendation of the DPC dated

05.04.2023 giving promotion to the private Opposite Parties No.4

Page 27 of 28

to 9 as well as the consequential promotion order issued in favour

of such private Opposite Parties. This Court further directs the

Opposite Party No.2 i.e. the Director, Secondary Education,

Odisha, Bhubaneswar to review all such promotions given after

31.03.2023. In the event the Opposite Party No.2 comes to a

conclusion that the provisions of the Amended Rules, 2023

notified in the Gazette dated 31.03.2023 has not been followed,

such cases be reviewed after providing adequate opportunity to the

persons who are likely to be affected. Every endeavour shall be

made by the Opposite Party No.2, through the concerned

DEOs/BEOs, to ensure that the provisions of the amended rules,

2023 is complied with strictly.

33. This Court further observes that in so far as any direct

recruit appointed against the Group-D promotion quota and

continuing in service are concerned, the cases of such employees

shall be considered and every endeavour shall be made to adjust

them against any vacant posts in the year of recruitment or the

subsequent years. Such a direction is being given considering the

fact that such direct recruitment employees are not at fault and that

they cannot be made to suffer because of the illegal action of the

Page 28 of 28

State-Opposite Parties. Let the entire exercise be carried out

within three months.

34. The writ petition stands allowed. However, there shall be

no order as to costs.

(Aditya Kumar Mohapatra)

Judge

Orissa High Court, Cuttack

The 25

th

June, 2026/ Anil Kumar Sahoo, Jr. Steno/

Debasis Aech, Secretary