RADHAKRISHNA DAS Vs. STATE OF ORISSA AND ORS.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THESE three writ petitions raised similar questions of facts and law. The cases have been heard together and are being disposed of by this common order. While the Petitioner in O.J.C. No. 702 of 1982 is an employee of the High Court, the Petitioners in the other two cases, O.J.C. No. 1516 of 1982 and O.J.C. No. 1780 of 1982 are practising lawyers. In all the writ petitions the State of Orissa represented by the Secretary to Government, Law Department and the Orissa Public Service Commission (hereinafter referred to as 'the Commission') have been impleaded as opposite parties 1 and 2 respectively. The other opposite parties are the candidates selected for appointment to the posts under the Orissa Judicial Service Class II.

(2.) THE State Government in its return has stated that it is not in a position to state in detail the manner an I procedure for selection of candidates in the absence of records which are available only with the Commission. The State Govt. further states that the list of 30 candidates selected by the Commission was received on 24 -10 -1980 along with the statement of the Commission that the list was prepared in accordance with the Rule 18 of the Rules. The State Government made appointments from time to time from the list so sent by the Commission.

(3.) IN view of the pleadings and the contention raised, the case turns on the interpretation of the relevant provisions of the rules. It would therefore be helpful to quote the material provisions of the Rules before proceeding further: