NARESH CHANDRA MOHANTY Vs. MAHANADI COAL FIELD LTD.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner argued the matter himself with a lot of anxiety, agony and passion. He has been fighting the legal battle since 1996. In between, he had also approached this Court on several occasions and the Hon'ble Supreme Court on a couple of occasions. However, this Court, at the outset, would like to observe that no amount of agony, anxiety or passion can take the place of law. Therefore, the case of the petitioner is to be scrutinized and assessed within the frame work of law. Although the petitioner in course of his argument pleaded on sympathy considering the long term legal battle, which he has been fighting since 1996, however, this Court is bound by the legal and Constitutional parameters to be observed mandatorily by this Court while adjudicating the case of the petitioner. Therefore, the sympathy and suffering of the petitioner as to take a back seat when the same is to be assessed vis-a-vis the procedure established by law.

(2.) The present writ petition has been filed by the petitioner by invoking the extraordinary jurisdiction of this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India with a prayer for a direction to the Opposite Party No.2 to appoint him in the post of Electrician CAT-III(T), which is lying vacant as per Annexure-9 with seniority as per select list which was in MCL from 1996 and in the alternative, the petitioner has prayed for appointment of adequate compensation for the damage caused to him as a result of arbitrary and whimsical act of the Opposite Parties.

(3.) The factual back ground of the petitioner's case, in a narrow compass, is that in the year 1996, the Mahanadi Coal Field Ltd. (in short hereinafter referred to as 'MCL') had sent a requisition to the Employment Exchange for sponsoring the names of the candidates having requisite qualification for filling up for the post Mazdoor Category-I, ITI trained candidates (advertisement No.1428 in the 1994). The Employment Exchange duly sponsored names of 664 candidates and such candidates submitted their Bio-datas and other details before the MCL. After due scrutiny, 316 candidates were allowed to appear in the written test held on 29/10/1995. Out of which 283 candidates including the present petitioner were called for trade test. On the basis of final result of the test, the final merit list of 240 ITI candidates were prepared, however, the same was not declared. Out of the aforesaid 240 candidates only 24 candidates were given appointment in different trades. Thereafter, 84 posts were sanctioned by the Opposite Parties and accordingly 51 candidates were given appointment in different trades. It is alleged that the said 51 candidates were given appointment by adopting pick and chose method.