AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
V. Narasingh, J
Heard learned counsel for the Petitioner and learned counsel for the State.
It is submitted by the learned counsel that the Petitioner was selected as a Constable (Civil) under S.E.B.C. Category in terms of the advertisement dated 30.12.2022 issued by the State Selection Board (SSB), Odisha Police.
It is further submitted that the Petitioner has been assigned the roll number 3000118183 and inadvertently the same has not been mentioned in the writ petition. To fortify his submission he places on record by way of memo the admit card issued to him wherein the said roll number has been reflected.
It is stated that during verification of his antecedent it came to fore that the Petitioner was charge sheeted vide Kanas P.S. C.S No.172 dated 31.07.2021 (Kanas P.S. Case No.135 dated 4.6.2021) and because of his antecedent, he is not being issued with the appointment order.
Relying on the report of the I.I.C., Kanas P.S, vide Annexure-4, attention of this Court was drawn to the fact that in the said communication it has been clearly stated that the Petitioner has been acquitted of the charges. The Petitioner has placed on record vide Annexure-5 the judgment of acquittal passed by the learned J.M.F.C., Kanas in G.R. Case No.1852 of 2021 (T.R. No.2068 of 2023) arising out of Kanas P.S. Case No.135 dated 4.6.2021.
It is asserted by the learned counsel that the applicants who were similarly arrayed as accused persons in criminal cases and subsequently acquitted from the charges, have been given posting as Constables whereas in the case of the Petitioner there has been hostile discrimination. The order in respect of one of such Constable Ramesh Chandra Sahu is at Annexure-7.
It is on record that ventilating the grievances the Petitioner has preferred a representation to the Superintendent of Police, Puri on 8.5.2023, vide Annexure-6, which has been received in his office as per the endorsement on the face of the said Annexure requesting for issuance of appointment letter in terms of his acquittal as noted above. But, the same is yet to be considered.
Considering the limited nature of the grievance and the materials on record, this Court is persuaded to hold that the interest of justice would be subserved if the Superintendent of Police, Puri, Opposite Party No.3, is directed to consider the representation of the Petitioner, vide Annexure-6, within a period of ten days from the date of receipt/production of a copy of this order.
It is asserted that the process of appointment of Constables is still going on. Keeping in view the same, it is directed that till such consideration one post of Constable (Civil) shall not be filled up.
It shall be incumbent upon the Petitioner to produce a copy of this order along with a copy of the writ petition before Opposite Party No.3.
The Writ Petition is accordingly disposed of.
Issue urgent certified copy of this order as per rules.
………………………………..