Mohanti, J. - (1.)In this writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution the validity of the appointment of Dr. Sri-krushna Sahu (opposite party No. 3) as the Second Medical Officer of the Bhu-baneswar Notified Area Council is under challenge.
(2.)The relevant facts are these : The Notified Area Council by its Resolution No. 29 dated 31-10-1964 (Annexure A/1) decided to create the post of a Second Medical Officer and advertised the same on 1-8-1965 (An-nexure A/3). Opposite Party No. 3 was temporarily appointed to the post and he joined on 31-8-1965. On 23-7-1971 he applied to the Notified Area Council for study leave to undergo the condensed M. B. B. S. course (vide Annexure E/3). On 24-7-1971 the N. A. C. moved the State Government for necessary instructions regarding the nature and period of leave to be admissible to opposite party No. 3 and for posting of a substitute in his place (vide Annexure H/3). On 31-7-1971 the N. A. C. by its Resolution No. 6 decided to relieve the opposite party No. 3 and to settle the nature of leave and the terms and conditions thereof later according to the directions of Government (vide Annexure G/3). On 12-8-1971 Government by their letter in Annexure F/3 directed the N. A. C. to relieve opposite party No. 3 to join the training course. On 13-8-1971 opposite party No. 3 was relieved of his duties. On 25-2-1972 the N. A. C. Issued an order cancelling allotment of a residential quarter in favour of opposite party No. 3. A copy of this order was forwarded to the State Government. Thereupon the State Government by their letter in Annexure 2 intimated that the N. A. C. had no obligation for opposite party No. 3 since he was appointed as a Medical Officer without having a post created with the approval of the Government. On 9-12-1972 the N. A. C. terminated the services of the opposite party No. 3 with retrospective effect from 13-8-1971, that is, the date on which he was relieved (vide Annexure K/3). Opposite party No. 3 preferred an appeal under Section 77 of the Orissa Municipal Act which was rejected by the State Government on the ground of limitation (vide Annexure 3). But on a subsequent representation to the Chief Minister, Government directed the N. A. C. to take back opposite party No. 3 and to regularise the period of his absence from duty (vide Annexure 5). On 116- 1975 the N. A. C. passed a Resolution (Annexure 7) accepting the Government order in Annexure 5. The petitioner challenges the legality of the appointment of the opposite party No. 3 on the following grounds 5
(i) At the time of his appointment on 31-8-1965, he had not passed the M. B. B. S. examination prescribed for the post of an Assistant Surgeon. He was not registered as a Medical practitioner as required under Section 15 of the Indian Medical Councils Act (ii) No prior sanction of the State Government had been obtained for creating the post of Second Medical Officer as required under Section 73 of the Orissa Municipal Act. (iii) The order of appointment in Annexure 7 is in contravention of Article 16 of the Constitution.

(3.)Opposite party No. 3 filed counter contending that there was ex post facto sanction of the State Government for the post during the relevant period; that he passed the condensed course from the Gopabandihu Ayurbeda Institute and held the D. M. S. M. diploma as required by the advertisement in An-nexure A/3; that the Government of Orissa recognised D. M. S. M. as equivalent to M. B. B. S. for service; that he wag duly registered in the State Medical Register on 14-2-1966; that he was relieved of his duties on 13-8-1971 on study leave terms to join the training course and that in the meantime he has passed the M. B. B. S. examination. He also contended that after the State Government directed the N. A. C. to take him back, the petitioner brought a proposal to abolish the post of Second Medical Officer but the Council by majority decided to continue the post. The petitioner is bound by the majority decision of the N. A. C. and has no locus standi to maintain the writ petition.