Sisir Kumar Pradhan v. State Of Odisha
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK
W.P.(C) No. 27851 of 2021 Sisir Kumar Pradhan ....
Petitioner Mr. Prafulla Kumar Mohapatra, (in person).
-versusState of Odisha & Ors.
....
Opposite Parties Mr. Biplaba Mohanty, SC (for S & ME Deptt.)
CORAM:
DR. JUSTICE S.K. PANIGRAHI Order No.
ORDER
27.09.2022 04.
1.This matters are taken up through hybrid arrangement.
2. The Petitioner No.4/ Jitendra Kumar Sahoo personally argues the matter.
3. Heard.
4. The petitioner No.4/Jitendra Kumar Sahoo has appeared in person, who challenges the advertisement dated 28.08.2021 issued by the Opposite Party No.2 for recruitment to the post of contractual Trained Graduate Teachers in Government Secondary Schools of the State of Odisha, 2021.
5. The petitioner has been debarred due to fixation of upper age limit 32 years without giving enhancement of
// 2 // upper age limit further 5 years as has been given in advertisement dated 13.08.2021 in view of the order dated 27.09.2018. Although the vacancies are for the year 2016. As a result, the petitioners who have the requisite qualifications and passed OSSTERT having B.Ed qualification have been deprived and debarred to be applied for the post of TGT. Therefore, the petitioner is prayed for a direction to the Opposite Parties to enhance and approach this Court. However, this Court allowed the petitioner to submit the application by offline through hard copy and directed to the Department of School and Mass Education to produce the result of the petitioners held for recruitment for the post of Contractual Trained Graduate Teachers and Telugu Teachers in Government Secondary Schools of the State of Odisha, 2021 pertaining to Notice/Advertisement dated 28.08.2021 issued by the Director of Secondary Education, Odisha, Bhubaneswar in a sealed cover.
6. Learned counsel for the State submitted the sealed cover before this Court and it was found that the petitioner is disqualified because of his score was only 47.75 which is far below the cut-off mark fixed by the authority.
// 3 //
7. In such view of the matter, the petitioner has failed to make out his case.
8. Accordingly, this Writ Petition is dismissed. (Dr. S.K. Panigrahi) Judge SD