IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK W.P.(C) No.1491 of 2022 Swagatika Sahoo & Ors. …. Petitioners Mr. D.N. Rath, Advocate -versus- State of Odisha & Ors. …. Opposite Parties Mr. S. Das, ASC Mr.B.S. Rayaguru, Adv. for O.P.15 & 21 CORAM: JUSTICE BIRAJA PRASANNA SATAPATHY Order No. ORDER 11.05.2026 33. 1. This matter is taken up through Hybrid Arrangement (Virtual/Physical) Mode. 2. Heard learned counsel appearing for the Parties. 3. On the face of the order passed by this Court on 17.03.2026, learned Addl. Standing Counsel fairly contended that he has failed to receive the instruction so directed. 4. The present Writ Petition has been filed inter alia with the following prayer:- “Under the above circumstance, it is therefore humbly prayed that this Hon’ble Court may be graciously pleased to issue writ in the nature of writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, direction or order by quashing the Final Gradation List of Forest Rangers, Group-B under Annexure-14. And this Hon’ble Court be pleased to direct the opposite parties 1 to 3 to recast the Final Gradation List of Forest Rangers, Group-B, taking into consideration the merit position of the petitioners vis-à-vis the opposite parties in the Common written examination assessment sheet under Annexure-3 as well as final marks secured by them after the viva voce test under Annexure-5 and also in terms of the 2019 Rules and the resolution of the Government dated 09.09.2021. And this Hon’ble Court be pleased to pass any further order / order or direction / directions as this Hon’ble Court deems fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case. And for this act of kindness, as in duty bound, the petitioner shall ever pray.” 5. It is contended that, basing on similar advertisement issued by the Odisha Public Service Commission (in short ‘Commission’) ’for recruitment as against the post of Forest Ranger vide Advertisement No.20/15-16 dtd.09.02.2016 and Advertisement No.21/2015-16 dtd.10.02.2016 under Annexures-1 & 2, a common written examination was held with publication of the assessment sheet under Annexure-3 during the period from 21.09.2016 to 01.10.2016. Not only that the Commission also published two select list on 25.09.2017 under Annexures-6 and 7. 5.1. It is contended that though the present Petitioners appeared the exam in terms of Advertisement No.21/2015-16 under Annexure-2 and the private Opposite Parties in terms of the advertisement issued vide Advertisement No.20/15-16 under Annexure-1, but since the Commission recommended the names of the selectees of both the advertisements vide two different notices issued on 25.09.2017 under Annexures-6 & 7, the seniority of such appointees pursuant to both the advertisements, should have been maintained, taking into account the subsequent development which take place, with issuance of the final merit list of Forest Range Officers under Annexure-9 after completion of the required training of the 2018-19 batch. 5.2. It is also fairly contended that even though fixation of inter se seniority is prescribed under the Orissa Forest Service Group-B (Recruitment and Conditions of Service) Rule, 2013 vide Annexure-8 (in short ‘Rules’) but Rule-24 of the Rules which prescribes the paraphernalia to be followed, so far as fixation of inter se seniority is concerned, is silent as to how seniority of two batch of selectees pursuant to two advertisements issued on a particular date with publication of the merit list on a particular day will be maintained. In the final gradation list published under Annexure-14 which is impugned in the Writ Petition, the appointees pursuant to Advertisement No.20/2015-16, have been placed above the Petitioners who are the appointees, pursuant to Advertisement No.21-2015/16. 5.3. It is contended that since the Rule is silent with regard to fixation of inter se seniority in between two groups, who took part in the recruitment though pursuant to two similar advertisement issued with one (1) day break, but with publication of the merit list vide two different notifications on a particular date by appearing a common written test, the seniority of the appointees in terms of both the advertisements, should have been made taking into the account the final merit list published after completion of the training, so issued under Annexure-9. But in absence of any clear provision governing the field, in the impugned gradation list issued under Annexure- 14, the appointees of Advertisement No.20/2015-16 have been illegally placed over the petitioners who are the appointees of Advt. No.21/2015-16. 5.4. It is accordingly contended that fixation of the seniority of the private Opposite Parties above the Petitioners in the impugned final gradation list under Annexure-14, without consideration of the objections filed by them against the provisional gradation list issued under Annexure-12, is not sustainable in the eye of law and requires interference of this Court. 6. Mr. B.S. Rayaguru, learned counsel appearing for the private Opposite Parties on the other hand contended that since admittedly the private Opposite Parties took the recruitment pursuant to the advertisement issued vide Advertisement No.20/2015-16 under Annexure-1 and the Petitioners in terms of Advertisement No.21- 2015/16 so issued under Annexure-2, even though a common written test was held with issuance of the select list vide two notifications issued on 25.09.2017 under Annexures-6 & 7, but since the private Opposite Parties took the recruitment pursuant to the advertisement issued earlier vide Advertisement No.20 and the Petitioner vide Advertisement No.21, no illegality or irregularity can be found with regard to the seniority fixed with due consideration of the objection of the Petitioners in the final gradation list under Annexure-14. 7. Similar stand has also been taken as found from the counter affidavit so filed by the State -Opposite Party Nos.2 and 3. It is however contended that since the Rule governing the field is silent with regard to fixation of seniority in between the two group of appointees, the private Opp. Parties having made the application vide Adv. No.20 and the Petitioners vide Adv. No.21, the Opposite Party Nos.1 to 3 thought it proper to give seniority to the appointees, who had made their applications pursuant to Adv. No.20. It is accordingly contended that the seniority in between the two groups has been rightly fixed in the final gradation list published under Annexure-14 and it requires no interference. However, it is fairly contended that the applicants pursuant to both the Advertisements not only appeared a common written examination, but also the select list was published by the Commission on 25.09.2017 under Annexures-6 & 7. 8. Considering the dispute, this Court passed the following order on 17.03.2026. “1. This matter is taken up through Hybrid Arrangement (Virtual/Physical) Mode. 2. Heard learned counsel appearing for the parties. 3. It is contended that though similar advertisement for recruitment of Forest Ranger was issued by the OPSC on 09.02.2016 and 10.02.2016, but a common written examination was held with publication of 2 (two) select lists on 25.09.2017, in respect of both the advertisements. 3.1. However, petitioners who appeared the written examination pursuant to the subsequent advertisement issued on 10.02.2016 have been placed below the selected candidates who got the benefit of appointment in terms of the advertisement issued on 09.02.2016. 3.2. It is contended that the said method adopted by the Opp. Parties while preparing the select list is not in terms of the provisions contained under Rule-24 of the Odisha Forest Service, Group-B (Recruitment and Conditions of Service) Rules, 2013. Rule-24 of the said Rules reads as follows:- “24. Inter se seniority- The inter se seniority of the officers appointed to the service in a particular year shall be in the order in which their names appear in the Select Lists.” 4. Considering the dispute involved and the provisions contained under Rule-24, learned Addl. Standing Counsel is directed to obtain instruction as to what modalities to be followed in terms of Rule-24 when the select list has been issued in a particular year but in respect of 2 (two) advertisements. 5. As requested by learned Addl. Standing Counsel, list this matter on 08.04.2026. Free copy to Mr. S. Das, learned Addl. Standing Counsel for compliance.” However, no instruction is forth coming, even though time was allowed on 08.04.2026 and 22.04.2026. 9. Having heard learned counsel appearing for the Parties and considering the submissions made, it is found that the Petitioners participated in the recruitment process in terms of the advertisement issued by the Commission vide Advertisement No.21/2015-16 dtd.10.02.2016, and the private Opposite Parties appeared the recruitment in terms of Advertisement No.20/2015-16 dtd.09.02.2016 so issued under Annexures-1 and 2. A common written test was held during the period from 21.09.2016 to 01.10.2016 in allowing the applicants who have made their applications pursuant to both the advertisements to take the written test. 9.1. Vide Notification dtd.25.10.2017 under Annexure-6 & 7, merit list of the selectees pursuant to both the advertisements was published by the Commission for their appointment as against the post of Forest Range Officer. 9.2. It is not disputed that, by the time such selection process was initiated, inter se seniority of the selectees is required to be fixed in terms of the provisions contained under Orissa Forest Service, Group-B (Recruitment & Conditions of Service) Rules, 2013. Rule-24 of the said rules prescribe the paraphernalia for fixation of the inter se seniority and the same reads as follows:- “24. Inter se seniority- The inter se seniority of the officers appointed to the service in a particular year shall be in the order in which their names appear in the Select Lists”. 9.3. This Court finds that pursuant to the advertisement issued vide Advertisement No.20 & 21 of 2015-16 under Annexure-1 & 2 on 09.02.2016 and 10.02.2016, a common written test was held amongst the candidates, during the period from 21.09.2016 to 01.10.2016 who had made their applications pursuant to the two advertisements. However, it is found that Commission vide two separate notifications issued on 25.09.2017 under Annexure-6 & 7, recommended the candidates, who have qualified in the selection process for their appointment. 9.4. It is further found that, after being so appointed and after completion of the training of the 2018 - 2019 batch, a final select list was published under Annexure-9 and thereafter the selectees were provided with their posting in different divisions, vide order under Annexure-10. Inter se seniority in between the selectees though is required to be fixed in terms of the provisions contained under Rule- 24 of the 2013 Rules, but since Rule 24 of the Rules which deals with fixation of inter se seniority, is silent as to what modality is to be followed when two recruitments were held, pursuant to two advertisements issued on 09.02.2016 and 10.02.2016 under Annexures-1 & 2, with holding of a common written test during the period from 21.09.2016 to 01.10.2016 and publication of the select list by the Commission on 25.09.2017 under Annexures- 6 & 7, this Court is of the view that Rule-24 of the Rules cannot be taken into consideration for fixation of the inter se seniority of the appointees appointed in terms of the selection process initiated vide the two advertisements. However, this Court placing reliance on the provisions contained under Rule-27 of the Rules, is of the view that Rule-24 of the Rules needs a proper interpretation by the State. Rule-27 of the Rules reads as follows:- “27. Interpretation- If any question arises relating to the interpretation of these rules; it shall be referred to the State Government whose decision thereon shall be final.” 9.5. Therefore, while not interfering with the position of the Petitioners vis-à-vis the private Opposite Parties so published in the impugned final gradation list published on dtd.15.11.2021 under Annexure-14 for the present, this Court placing reliance on Rule-27 of the Rules directs Opposite Party No.1 to refer the matter to the appropriate Government so far as fixation of inter se seniority of both the selectees is concerned. 9.6. Opposite Party No.1 is directed to make the reference within a period of one (1) month from the date of receipt of this order. Appropriate Government is directed to take a lawful decision with regard to fixation of inter-se seniority in between the selectees of both the advertisements, by giving an opportunity of hearing to one of the representative from both the groups. Appropriate Government is directed to take a lawful decision within a period of two (2) months from the date of such reference being made by Opposite Party No.1. 9.7. However, it is observed that seniority fixed in between both the groups with publication of the impugned final gradation list on 15.11.2021 under Annexure-14, shall be subject to final outcome of the decision to be taken by the appropriate Government, so directed. 10. Accordingly, the Writ Petition stands disposed of. (Biraja Prasanna Satapathy) Judge Subrat