HC directs govt to revise ASO seniority list based on appointment date
1
2
Cuttack: Orissa high court has directed the state govt to revise the seniority list of assistant section officers (ASOs)in the Odisha Secretariat Service, impacting hundreds of employees.
The vacation bench's verdict settles a long-standing dispute concerning seniority among two batches of ASOs — direct recruits appointed through two separate advertisements and between promotees and direct recruits.
Further, the verdict brings clarity to service-related disputes that lingered for years while providing relief to employees who were appointed earlier but placed lower in the final gradation list of ASOs published on June 11, 2020.
A total of 10 writ petitions were clubbed together for hearing, categorised into two groups. The first group, comprising seven petitions, involved a dispute between two sets of direct recruits: one recruited under Odisha Public Service Commission (OPSC)'s advertisement no. 06 dated May 14, 2015, for ST category candidates (140), and another (811) under advertisement no. 08 of Oct 6, 2012. The second group of three petitions involved disputes between promotees and direct recruits.
The HC noted that although advertisement no. 6 was issued earlier, appointments from the list were delayed until Oct 2016 due to legal hurdles and administrative delays. In contrast, candidates under the 2015 advertisement were appointed earlier — on Jan 27 and May 18, 2016.
In the judgment on June 3, the vacation bench of Justice B P Routray upheld the principle that seniority in govt service should be based on the actual date of appointment, not the date of the recruitment advertisement or recommendation — unless a rule explicitly states otherwise.
Justice Routray ruled that ASOs appointed earlier in 2016 under advertisement no. 6 must be placed above those appointed later in the same year under advertisement no. 8 in the final gradation list published on June 11, 2020.
Justice Routray further ruled that promotees must be treated as en-bloc seniors to the direct recruits of the same calendar year. Accordingly, Justice Routray ordered the home department to revise the ASO gradation list in line with the HC's directives, ensuring that seniority reflects the actual date of appointment. The judgment reinforced a key service jurisprudence, "He who is appointed earlier, ranks earlier.
"
Get the latest lifestyle updates on Times of India, along with
Eid wishes
,
messages
, and
quotes
!
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Time of India
9 hours ago
- Time of India
Dr Ambedkar portrait to be installed in court halls
Bengaluru: The Karnataka High Court notified that a portrait of Dr BR Ambedkar, the architect of the Constitution of India, would be installed in all court halls of the high court Benches in Bengaluru, Dharwad, and Kalaburagi, as well as in district court halls across the state. Tired of too many ads? go ad free now Two circulars were issued in this regard on June 19, and necessary instructions were given for taking steps for the installation of the portraits. Following requests from the public, advocates and organisations, alongside a govt communication advocating the measure, on April 26, a full court of the HC passed a resolution to display Dr Ambedkar's photo prominently in all court halls.
Time of India
9 hours ago
- Time of India
HC sets aside govt order barring candidate from govt service
Cuttack: The Orissa high court has set aside the Odisha govt's 2017 order that permanently barred a SC candidate, Dibakar Patra, from all future govt employment for procedural lapses in a judicial recruitment process. The court, however, upheld the cancellation of his candidature for the post of civil judge. Patra, a non-judicial court employee, had applied for the post of civil judge pursuant to a notification issued by the Odisha Public Service Commission (OPSC) in 2017. However, he failed to route his application through the proper channel — his employer — and did not obtain a mandatory 'No Objection Certificate' before entering the recruitment process. Citing this violation, the govt cancelled his candidature and permanently debarred him from future govt service via an order dated June 30, 2017. Aggrieved, Patra approached the high court the same year, seeking redress. Delivering the verdict on June 17, a division bench of Justices Dixit Krishna Shripad and MS Sahoo noted that while Patra's actions were procedurally incorrect, the punishment meted out was "too harsh to be sustained." by Taboola by Taboola Sponsored Links Sponsored Links Promoted Links Promoted Links You May Like Treatment That Might Help You Against Knee Pain Knee pain | search ads Find Now Undo "As a layman, what he has done is wrong and therefore, he cannot be crushed by a sledge hammer, when a mild pinch would do the rightful," the bench observed, invoking the principle of proportionality. The court noted that the impugned govt order was not a "speaking order" and lacked specific reasons to justify such a severe punishment. "No special reasons are assigned to justify a permanent embargo as if a heinous sin is committed by the candidate," the bench stated, adding that his mistake did not reflect a guilty mind or serious misconduct. While agreeing with the state counsel that Patra's entry into the recruitment process was vitiated by illegality and hence could not result in appointment, the court rejected the govt's decision to permanently debar him from all future public employment. The bench clarified that Patra is entitled to participate in future recruitment processes if otherwise eligible. "Errors do occur in any human transaction... His case is miles away from the precincts of penal provision," the judgment said. The high court thus quashed the June 30, 2017 govt order only to the extent it permanently barred Patra from public employment, offering the petitioner a fresh chance to pursue govt service.
The Hindu
21 hours ago
- The Hindu
Moral policing shadows couples in Chennai
Does the sight of young lovers or people of different genders hanging out together irk Chennaites? This February, advocate Thilagavati confronted a patrolman who harassed her for being with a male friend at night on Patinapakkam beach. She had recorded the encounter and uploaded it on social media. This led to much discussion on the topic of moral policing in public places in the city. Uproar over Ms. Thilagavati's experience had led to the officer being transferred. But the woman later faced cyberbullying about which she complained to the cyber police. 'More than men, women are targeted by law enforcement officers in such circumstances,' she says. Courts not supposed to do moral policing: Supreme Court sets aside HC order against Tehseen Poonawalla Many young men and women complain of similar experiences of being victims of the moral police brigade, that have left them traumatised. 'Couples, especially teenagers, are easily targetted. They are then threatened and blackmailed into bribing or assault,' says Ms. Thilagavati. Out with her boyfriend in Anna Nagar Tower Park, Thamizh, a woman in her twenties, says that they too were picked on by policemen. 'It happens all the time. Sometimes they even call up our parents,' she tells The Hindu. Even as she was speaking, a policewoman stared down at the young couple and asked them to 'move ahead.' They silently obeyed. UCC Bill 'introduces moral policing, criminalises autonomy' 'It is not good for young people if their future spouses see them being with another man/woman. Girls should carefully choose good boys that their parents approve of. They can do these intimate things after marriage also. Why now? That too in public,' reasons Meena (name changed), head constable at a police station in Anna Nagar. Meanwhile, a senior police officer of the Greater Chennai Police says, 'Policemen are not instructed to confront couples, unless a safety issue arises. They have the right to be together in public.' The 8.8 acre Thiru. Vi. Ka. Park in Shenoy Nagar has 26 security personnel and reportedly no CCTV camera inside. It is known for its watchful guards who spring into action when men and women sitting together even begin to think of holding hands. They whistle, glare down and show hand gestures before directly confronting the couples. 'We have instructions from the CMRL to interfere when couples sit too close together,' says Surya, a guard there. Sartorial preferences of women should not be subjected to moral policing: HC 'The Thiru. Vi. Ka. Park is designed in a way that there are no hideouts for couples to do inappropriate things. Every corner has high visibility and is covered by guards, who have been told to prevent intimacy between couples,' confirms a CMRL official, on the condition of anonymity. Those facing moral policing can assert their rights under Articles 19 (freedom of expression) and 21 (right to life and liberty). The Supreme Court and Madras High Court have upheld personal liberty under Article 21, affirming adults' rights to consensual relationships and privacy in public spaces. 'They can demand specific legal grounds for intervention, refuse arbitrary demands, and record interactions as evidence. Unlawful detention can be challenged with a habeas corpus and complaints can be filed with the Human Rights Commission or Women's Commission,' says Sonam Chandwani, an advocate. 'Healthy interaction between the opposite sexes should always be encouraged,' says advocate and human rights activist Sudha Ramallingam. 'In Western cultures, couples openly engage in public display of affection and this is not looked upon as vulgar. Why should it be vulgar here? I don't understand what morality or decency people are trying to uphold and impose by moral policing,' she adds.
