Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Orissa · body

2026 DAILYLAW 4522 (ORI)

DHARITRI CHHURA v. STATE OF ODISHA

WP(C)/7278/2026 · 2026-04-27

Chittaranjan Dash

Writ Petition (Civil)body2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK W.P.(C) No.7278 of 2026 Dharitri Chhura …. Petitioner Mr. Bharat Jalli, Advocate -versus- State Of Odisha & Ors. …. Opp. Parties Mr. S.K. Jee, AGA CORAM: THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE CHITTARANJAN DASH Order No. ORDER 27.04.2026 01. 1. By means of this application, the Petitioner seeks the following relief: - “It is therefore, prayed that let this Hon’ble Court may graciously be pleased to allow the Writ Petition, issue a writ in nature of certiorari or any other appropriate writ quashing the Reject List dated. 20.03.2018 (downloaded) in rejecting the application of the Petitioner under Annexure-1 (SL. No.11) by directing the Opposite Parties more particularly to Opp. Party No.3 to engage/appoint the Petitioner as Sikshya Sahayak in the District of Bolangir in term of the judgments under Annexures-5 & 6. And further be pleased to issue any other writ/writs, order/orders as this Hon’ble Court may deem fit and proper in the eye of law.” 2. Learned counsel for the Petitioner submits that the issue involved in the present writ petition is no longer res integra and stands squarely covered by the judgment of this Court dated 22.11.2024 passed in W.P.(C) No.7190 of 2018, wherein this Court held that insistence on RCI registration certificate as an eligibility condition, in absence of such stipulation in the governing resolution/advertisement, was unsustainable. It is further submitted that the said judgment has since been affirmed by the Division Bench in W.A. Nos.768, 770, 771 and 800 of 2025, disposed of on 15.01.2026. 3. In view of the above, and for the reasons assigned in the judgment dated 22.11.2024 passed in W.P.(C) No.7190 of 2018 and analogous matters, as affirmed in decisions noted above, the present Writ Petition is allowed. 4. Accordingly, the rejection of candidature of the Petitioner on the aforesaid ground is quashed. The Opposite Party-authorities are directed to consider the candidature of the Petitioner for engagement/appointment to the post of Sikshya Sahayak or its equivalent/redesignated post, if otherwise eligible and if found suitable on merit, and to pass consequential orders within a period of eight weeks from the date of production of a certified copy of this order. 5. It is made clear that this Court has not examined any other disqualification, if any, apart from the issue decided herein. 6. The Writ Petition is accordingly disposed of. (Chittaranjan Dash) Judge Priyanka CUTTACK