The name of Dr. Mohapatra was recommended to Government along with the advice that the Commission had maintained a reserve list of suitable candidates for a period of one year from the date of recommendation.
The Government found that the department of Surgical Gastroenterology was under staffed as it had only one Professor and one Lecturer and it was number in accordance with MCI pattern.
The facts are as follows The petitioner in S.L.P. 10472 10474/95 hereinafter referred to as the petitioner, a qualified surgeon with M.S. Degree in General Surgery and been working in the Department of Gastroenterology of S.C.B. Medical Collage, Cuttack as an Assistant Surgeon from 17.09.1987.
Six other persons had also applied for the same post.
Dr. Mohapatra was appointed as Junior Teacher.
As regards the qualification of the petitioner the Tribunal observed as follow The most important question to be decided is whether Dr. Sahoo possesses the requisite qualification and eligibility for the post of Lecturer in Surgical Gastroenterology.
1614 c /94 by one Nibas Chandra Mishra.
MCI 12 1 /91 Med/21954 dated 27.12.91 replied that the matter was companysidered by the companyncil at its meeting and it was decided as under The Postgraduate Committee agreed for the appointment of teachers as Lecturers in the department of Gastroenterology possessing M.S. General Surgery with 2 years special training in Surgical Gastroenterology which should be in a recognized institution as prescribed by the MCI in recommendations on Teachers eligibility qualifications for other similar departments.
These S.L.P. came up for hearing on 15.02.95 before a Bench of two Judges.
On the above reasoning the Tribunal granted the second prayer of the applicants and restrained the appointment of the petitioner as lecturer.
From 17.09.87, he was assisting the professor and Head of the Department of Surgical gastroenterology for about five years during which period he had acquired Special training experience in the said subject.
The applications were opposed by the Government and the petitioner on merits as well as on grounds of maintainability.
On 30.08.93, the Commission recommended the name of the pititioner for appointment.
Even before the issue of advertisement the Health and Family Welfare Department of the Government of Orissa sought clarification regarding qualification for appointment to the post of lecturer in the Department of Gastroenterology vide letter number 43633/Hd 26.12.90.
The Tribunal directed the Health and Family Welfare Department to take appropriate steps for filling up the post after companyplying with the relevant statutory provisions and issuing a fresh advertisement through the Public Service Commission.
The Director expressed his opinion in his letter number 1387 MET.
The institution in which the petitioner was working, namely S.C.B. Medical College is also one of the institutions recognized by the M.C.I In response to the aforesaid advertisement, the petitioner applied for the post of Junior Teacher Lecturer in the discipline of Surgical Gastroenterology.
There is numberindication to show that SCB medical companylege has been recognized as an institution for imparting special training in Surgical Gastroenterology.
10472 10474/95.
For the post of surgical gastroenterology, candidates possessing M.S. general surgical Degree with 2 years special training in surgical gastroenterology from the institution recognised by the M.C.I. are eligible.
The Bench passed the following order Whether a public interest litigation can be entertained by the Administrative Tribunal under Section 19 of the Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985 is thee question raised by the appellantt State of Orissa Ors?
The minimum educational qualification was prescribed as under A candidate must have obtained a post Graduate Degree in speciality or any other equivalent degree or qualification prescribed by the I.M.C. Dental Council of India as the case may be for all the above posts.
The substance of the allegations was that the petitioner did number possess the qualifications prescribed for the post of Lecturer and the Government in order to accommodate him created another post which was number advertised.
Earlier he worked as lecturer in General Surgery from 11.06.84 to 17.09.86.
J U D G E M E N T SRINIVASAN.
The Tribunal refused to quash the Government order creating the post and rejected the first prayer.
The averment in all the three applications were almost identical.
dated 20.7.92 that the petitioner was qualified to be companysidered as per MCI ruler along with other eligible candidates.
The petitioner has challenged the said order in S.L.P. Nos.
The Orissa Public Service Commission caused advertisement No.
Two questions have arisen for decision 1 whether an Administrative Tribunal companystituted under Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985 hereinafter referred to as the Act can entertain a public interest litigation and ii whether on the facts of this case the Tribunal has exceed its jurisdication in passing the impugned order?
The The State Government has filed S.L.P. Nos.
The Medical Council of India for short M.C.I. in Letter No.
On the same day, the Government requested the Public Service Commission to recommend the name of a suitable candidate from the reserve list.
J. Leave granted.
The petitioner and Dr. M.K. Mohapatra were called for the viva voce test.
At that stage one candi charan Routray in his capacity as General Secretary, Cuttack Surakhya Committee filed O.A. 1439/93 before the Principal Bench of the Central Administrative Tribunal at Bhubaneswar.
The last date for receipt of applications was 15.05.92.
18714 18716/95 against the same order.
Another application O.A. 1630/93 was filed by the Cuttack surakhya Committee through Jitendra Kumar Mishra before the same Bench.
It was only on that basis the minimum of two years special training in a recognized institution was prescribed as part of the minimum qualification for the post of Lecturer in the case of candidates possessing M.S. General Surgery degree.
A third application was filed before the Cuttack Bench in O.A. No.
The Tribunal held that the applications were maintainable at the instance of the applicants.
A perusal of the clarificatory letter issued by the IMC to the Secretary, Health F.W. Deptt.
It was alleged that the petitioner had exerted influence over the companycerned authorities and managed to secure the appointment.
Hence the Government created one more post of Lecturer on 25.08.93.
According to the applicants the appointment was number only malafide and illegal but it was also against public interest.
The case of the petitioner and that of Dr. K. Dehata were referred to the Director of Medical Education Training by the Public Service Commission for his opinion on their eligibility for selection.
