{"id":30385,"date":"2011-08-02T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2011-08-01T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/orissa-public-service-commn-anr-vs-rupashree-chowdhary-anr-on-2-august-2011"},"modified":"2018-09-29T05:53:36","modified_gmt":"2018-09-29T00:23:36","slug":"orissa-public-service-commn-anr-vs-rupashree-chowdhary-anr-on-2-august-2011","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/orissa-public-service-commn-anr-vs-rupashree-chowdhary-anr-on-2-august-2011","title":{"rendered":"Orissa Public Service Commn.& Anr vs Rupashree Chowdhary & Anr on 2 August, 2011"},"content":{"rendered":"
Supreme Court of India<\/div>\n
Orissa Public Service Commn.& Anr vs Rupashree Chowdhary & Anr on 2 August, 2011<\/div>\n
Author: . M Sharma<\/div>\n
Bench: Mukundakam Sharma, Anil R. Dave<\/div>\n
                                                                           REPORTABLE\n\n\n                   IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA\n\n                    CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION\n\n\n\n\n                   CIVIL APPEAL NO.   6201  OF 2011\n\n                 [Arising out of SLP(C) No. 6751 of 2010]\n\n\n\n\n\nOrissa Public Service Commission & Anr.                        ....Appellant(s)\n\n\n\n\n\n                                    VERSUS\n\n\n\n\nRupashree Chowdhary & Anr.                          ....Respondent(s)\n\n\n\n\n\n                                    JUDGMENT\n<\/pre>\n
Dr. MUKUNDAKAM SHARMA, J.\n<\/p>\n
1. Leave granted.\n<\/p>\n
2. The   present   appeal   is   filed   against   the   judgment   and   order   dated <\/p>\n
   08.12.2009 passed by the Orissa High Court at Cuttack whereby the <\/p>\n
   High Court allowed the appeal filed by the Respondent No. 1 herein <\/p>\n
   and   ordered   for   rounding   off   of   the   aggregate   marks   of   the <\/p>\n
                                     Page 1 of 9<\/span><\/p>\n
  respondent from 44.93% to 45% along with two other candidates but <\/p>\n
  not   parties   before   the   Court   and   held   her   eligible   to   appear   in   the <\/p>\n
  interview as per Rule 24 of the Orissa Superior Judicial Service and <\/p>\n
  Orissa Judicial Service Rules, 2007 [for short “the Rules”].\n<\/p>\n
3. The facts leading to the filing of the present case are that the Orissa <\/p>\n
  Public   Service   Commission   [in   short   “the   OPSC”]   published   an <\/p>\n
  advertisement   inviting   applications   from   suitable   candidates   for   the <\/p>\n
  Orissa   Judicial   Service   Examination,   2009   for   direct   recruitment   to <\/p>\n
  fill   up   77   posts   of   Civil   Judges   (J.D),   pursuant   to   which,   the <\/p>\n
  respondent   No.   1   applied   for   the   said   post.   She   appeared   in   the <\/p>\n
  Preliminary   Written   Examination   held   on   15.05.2009.   Being <\/p>\n
  successful in the Preliminary Written Examination, she appeared in <\/p>\n
  the Main Written Examination which was held from 15-18.07.2009.\n<\/p>\n
  The list of successful candidates, who were eligible for interview, was <\/p>\n
  published on 25.8.2009 in which respondent’s name was not there.\n<\/p>\n
  Immediately   after   publication   of   the   result   of   the   Main   Written <\/p>\n
  Examination,   the   respondent   applied   for   her   marks   in   the   Main <\/p>\n
  Written   Examination   and   the   mark   sheet   of   the   respondent   was <\/p>\n
  issued   to her   on her  request on 27.10.2009, which  she received on <\/p>\n
  03.11.2009.\n<\/p>\n
4. After receiving the same, she came to know that she had secured 337 <\/p>\n
  out  of 750,  i.e.,  44.93% of marks in aggregate  &  more  than  33%  of <\/p>\n
  marks  on  each subject. As per Rule 24 of the Rules the  candidates <\/p>\n
  who have secured not less than 45% of the marks in aggregate & not <\/p>\n
  less   than   minimum   of   33%   of   marks   in   each   paper   in   the   written <\/p>\n
  examination should be called for viva-voce test. Since the respondent <\/p>\n
  secured   44.93%   marks   in   aggregate   she   was   not   called   for <\/p>\n
  interview\/viva-voce.   Aggrieved   thereby   she   approached   the   High <\/p>\n
  Court of Orissa by filing a Writ Petition W.P. (C) No. 16782 of 2009 <\/p>\n
  with  a prayer that she  should have been called  for  the interview as <\/p>\n
  the fraction of marks, i.e., 44.93%, secured by her should have been <\/p>\n
  rounded off to 45% & in that way she would have fulfilled the criteria <\/p>\n
  as   per   the   Rules.   The   High   Court   vide   its   order   dated   08.12.2009 <\/p>\n
  allowed the writ petition filed by the respondent herein against which <\/p>\n
  this appeal has been filed, upon which, we heard the learned counsel <\/p>\n
  appearing for the parties.\n<\/p>\n
5. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the appellant submitted that <\/p>\n
  as   per   Rule   24   of   the   Rules   a   candidate   who   has   secured   not   less <\/p>\n
  than 45% of marks in aggregate could only be called for the interview <\/p>\n
  and   since   the   respondent   secured   only   337   out   of   750   marks   [i.e., <\/p>\n
                                      Page 3 of 9<\/span><\/p>\n
      44.93%] in the Main Written Examination she was not called for the <\/p>\n
      interview. Counsel submitted that the High Court erred in permitting <\/p>\n
      the   rounding   off   of   the   marks   of   the   respondent   as   there   is   no <\/p>\n
      provision   of   rounding   off   or   relaxation   of   marks   under   the   Rules <\/p>\n
      which   permit   the   Commission   to   give   such   a   kind   of   grace   to   the <\/p>\n
      respondent.   He   further   submitted   that   High   Court   also   erred   in <\/p>\n
      permitting 2 more candidates to sit in the interview by rounding off <\/p>\n
      their   marks   to   45%   even   when   they   were   not   party   to   the   Writ <\/p>\n
      Petition before it.\n<\/p>\n
6. Learned   counsel   appearing   on   behalf   of   the   respondent   however <\/p>\n
      refuted   the   contentions   made   by   the   counsel   appearing   for   the <\/p>\n
      appellant   and   submitted   that   the   High   Court   rightly   and   correctly <\/p>\n
      permitted the  respondent  to be  called  for  the  interview by  rounding <\/p>\n
      off the marks obtained by her to 45%. He further submitted that the <\/p>\n
      High Court rightly held that in the absence of any Rule dealing with <\/p>\n
      the fraction of = marks or even less secured by the candidates, while <\/p>\n
      determining the percentage of marks the same could be rounded off <\/p>\n
      to the next whole number.\n<\/p>\n
7.    Learned counsel appearing for the respondents during the course of <\/p>\n
      his   arguments   relied   upon   the   decisions   of   this   Court   in  State   of <\/p>\n
   Orissa   and   Another  v.  Damodar   Nayak<\/a>  reported   in   (1997)   4   SCC <\/p>\n
   560,  State   of   U.P.   and   Another  v.  Pawan   Kumar   Tiwari   and <\/p>\n
   Others<\/a>  reported   in   (2005)   2   SCC   10,  Union   of   India  v.  S.   Vinodh <\/p>\n
   Kumar<\/a>  reported   in   (2007)   8   SCC   100   and  Bhudev   Sharma  v.\n<\/p>\n
   District Judge, Bulandshahr and Another reported in (2008) 1 SCC <\/p>\n
   233.     On   scrutiny,   we   find   that   the   findings   recorded   in   the   above <\/p>\n
   referred   cases   are   not   applicable   to   the   facts   of   the   present   case.\n<\/p>\n
   Facts and findings recorded by this Court in the above referred cases <\/p>\n
   are   distinguishable   to   facts   of   the   case   in   hand.   Almost   all   the <\/p>\n
   aforesaid cases dealt with post or vacancies where it was allowed to <\/p>\n
   be rounded off to make one whole post. Understandably there cannot <\/p>\n
   be a fraction of a post.\n<\/p>\n
8. In   the   light   of   the   detailed   records   placed   before   us   we   have <\/p>\n
   considered   the   aforesaid   submissions   of   the   counsel   appearing   for <\/p>\n
   the parties. The appointment to the post of Civil Judge (J.D.) under <\/p>\n
   the   Orissa   Judicial   Services   is   guided   by   Orissa   Superior   Judicial <\/p>\n
   Service and Orissa Judicial Service Rules, 2007 and Rule 24 thereof <\/p>\n
   specifically   deal   with   the   criteria   for   determining   of   candidates   for <\/p>\n
   interview. Rule 24 reads thus: –\n<\/p>\n
         “24. Determination of number of candidates for interview –  <\/p>\n
                                       Page 5 of 9<\/span><\/p>\n
       The   Commission   shall   call   the   candidates   for   interview  <\/p>\n
       who   have   secured   not   less   than   forty-five   per   centum   of  <\/p>\n
       marks   in   aggregate   and   a   minimum   of   thirty   three   per  <\/p>\n
       centum   of   marks   in   each   paper   in   the   Main   written  <\/p>\n
       examination.”\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
\n<\/blockquote>\n
9. A bare reading of the aforesaid rules would make it crystal clear that <\/p>\n
  in   order   to   qualify   in   the   written   examination   a   candidate   has   to <\/p>\n
  obtain a minimum of 33% marks in each of the papers and not less <\/p>\n
  than 45% of marks in the aggregate in all the written papers in the <\/p>\n
  Main examination. When emphasis is given in the Rules itself to the <\/p>\n
  minimum marks to be obtained making it clear that at least the said <\/p>\n
  minimum   marks   have   to   be   obtained   by   the   concerned   candidate <\/p>\n
  there cannot be a question of relaxation or rounding off.\n<\/p>\n
10.There is no power provided in the statute\/Rules permitting any such <\/p>\n
  rounding off or giving grace marks so as to bring up a candidate to <\/p>\n
  the   minimum   requirement.   In   our   considered   opinion,   no   such <\/p>\n
  rounding   off  or   relaxation   was   permissible.   The   Rules  are   statutory <\/p>\n
  in nature and no dilution or amendment to such Rules is permissible <\/p>\n
  or   possible   by   adding   some   words   to   the   said   statutory   rules   for <\/p>\n
  giving the benefit of rounding off or relaxation.\n<\/p>\n
11. We may also draw support in this connection from a decision of this <\/p>\n
  Court   in  District   Collector   &   Chairman,   Vizianagaram   Social <\/p>\n
  Welfare   Residential   School   Society,   Vizianagaram   and   Another.\n<\/p>\n
  v.  M.   Tripura   Sundari   Devi  reported   in  (1990)   3   SCC   655.   In   the <\/p>\n
  said judgment this Court has laid down that when an advertisement <\/p>\n
  mentions   a   particular   qualification   and   an   appointment   is   made   in <\/p>\n
  disregard   of   the   same   then   it   is   not   a   matter   only   between   the <\/p>\n
  appointing authority and the appointee concerned. The aggrieved are <\/p>\n
  all   those   who   had   similar   or   even   better   qualifications   than   the <\/p>\n
  appointee   or   appointees   but   who   had   not   applied   for   the   post <\/p>\n
  because   they   did   not   possess   the   qualifications   mentioned   in   the <\/p>\n
  advertisement.\n<\/p>\n
12.The   entire   record   of   the   main   written   examination   was   also <\/p>\n
  produced   before   us   which   indicates   that   there   are   also   candidates <\/p>\n
  who have got more than the respondent in the aggregate but has not <\/p>\n
  been able to get 33% marks in each paper and have missed it only by <\/p>\n
  a   whisker.   In   case,   the   contention   of   the   counsel   appearing   for   the <\/p>\n
  respondent is accepted then those candidates who could not get 33% <\/p>\n
  marks   in   each   paper   in   the   Main   written   examination   could   and <\/p>\n
  should have also been called for viva-voce examination, which would <\/p>\n
  amount to a very strange and complicated situation and also would <\/p>\n
                                      Page 7 of 9<\/span><\/p>\n
   lead to the violation of the sanctity of statutory provision.\n<\/p>\n
13.When   the   words   of   a   statute   are   clear,   plain   or   unambiguous,   i.e., <\/p>\n
   they are reasonably susceptible to only one meaning, the courts are <\/p>\n
   bound to give effect to that meaning irrespective of consequences, for <\/p>\n
   the   Act   speaks   for   itself.   There   is   no   ambiguity   in   the   language   of <\/p>\n
   Rule 24 leading to two conclusions and allowing an interpretation in <\/p>\n
   favour   of   the   respondent   which   would   be   different   to   what   was <\/p>\n
   intended by the Statute. Therefore, no rounding off of the aggregate <\/p>\n
   marks is permitted in view of the clear and unambiguous language of <\/p>\n
   Rule 24 of the Rules under consideration.\n<\/p>\n
14.The   High  Court,   in  our  considered  opinion,  has  also   committed  an <\/p>\n
   error   apparent   on   the   face   of   the   records   by   allowing   two   more <\/p>\n
   persons,   who   secured   marks   between   44.5%   and   45%,   to   be   called <\/p>\n
   for   interview   who   were   not   even   parties   before   it   and   who   had   not <\/p>\n
   even shown interest subsequently to be appointed subsequent to the <\/p>\n
   declaration of the results of the examination but despite the said fact <\/p>\n
   the High Court directed them also to be called for the interview only <\/p>\n
   on the ground that they have secured more than 44.5% of marks but <\/p>\n
   less than 45% marks in the main written examination in aggregate.\n<\/p>\n
15.In  that view of the  matter,  the appeal is  allowed  and the judgment <\/p>\n
  and   order   of the   High  Court   is   set  aside   leaving  the   parties  to  bear <\/p>\n
  their own costs.\n<\/p>\n
                                               ………………………………………….J<\/p>\n
                                                    (Dr. MUKUNDAKAM SHARMA)<\/p>\n
                                              …………………………………………..J<\/p>\n
                                                      (ANIL R. DAVE)<\/p>\n
NEW DELHI,<\/p>\n
AUGUST 2, 2011.\n<\/p>\n
                                     Page 9 of 9<\/span><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Supreme Court of India Orissa Public Service Commn.& Anr vs Rupashree Chowdhary & Anr on 2 August, 2011 Author: . M Sharma Bench: Mukundakam Sharma, Anil R. Dave REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL NO. 6201 OF 2011 [Arising out of SLP(C) No. 6751 of 2010] Orissa Public Service […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_lmt_disableupdate":"","_lmt_disable":"","_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[30],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-30385","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-supreme-court-of-india"],"yoast_head":"\nOrissa Public Service Commn.& Anr vs Rupashree Chowdhary & Anr on 2 August, 2011 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India<\/title>\n<meta name=\"robots\" content=\"index, follow, max-snippet:-1, max-image-preview:large, max-video-preview:-1\" \/>\n<link rel=\"canonical\" href=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/orissa-public-service-commn-anr-vs-rupashree-chowdhary-anr-on-2-august-2011\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Orissa Public Service Commn.& Anr vs Rupashree Chowdhary & Anr on 2 August, 2011 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/orissa-public-service-commn-anr-vs-rupashree-chowdhary-anr-on-2-august-2011\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:publisher\" content=\"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:published_time\" content=\"2011-08-01T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2018-09-29T00:23:36+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:image\" content=\"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg?fit=512%2C512&ssl=1\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:width\" content=\"512\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:height\" content=\"512\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:type\" content=\"image\/jpeg\" \/>\n<meta name=\"author\" content=\"Legal India Admin\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:creator\" content=\"@legaliadmin\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:site\" content=\"@Legal_india\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Written by\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"Legal India Admin\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:label2\" content=\"Est. reading time\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data2\" content=\"8 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\\\/\\\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/orissa-public-service-commn-anr-vs-rupashree-chowdhary-anr-on-2-august-2011#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/orissa-public-service-commn-anr-vs-rupashree-chowdhary-anr-on-2-august-2011\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"Orissa Public Service Commn.& Anr vs Rupashree Chowdhary & Anr on 2 August, 2011\",\"datePublished\":\"2011-08-01T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2018-09-29T00:23:36+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/orissa-public-service-commn-anr-vs-rupashree-chowdhary-anr-on-2-august-2011\"},\"wordCount\":1595,\"commentCount\":0,\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\"},\"articleSection\":[\"Supreme Court of India\"],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"CommentAction\",\"name\":\"Comment\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/orissa-public-service-commn-anr-vs-rupashree-chowdhary-anr-on-2-august-2011#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/orissa-public-service-commn-anr-vs-rupashree-chowdhary-anr-on-2-august-2011\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/orissa-public-service-commn-anr-vs-rupashree-chowdhary-anr-on-2-august-2011\",\"name\":\"Orissa Public Service Commn.& Anr vs Rupashree Chowdhary & Anr on 2 August, 2011 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2011-08-01T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2018-09-29T00:23:36+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/orissa-public-service-commn-anr-vs-rupashree-chowdhary-anr-on-2-august-2011#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/orissa-public-service-commn-anr-vs-rupashree-chowdhary-anr-on-2-august-2011\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/orissa-public-service-commn-anr-vs-rupashree-chowdhary-anr-on-2-august-2011#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Orissa Public Service Commn.& Anr vs Rupashree Chowdhary & Anr on 2 August, 2011\"}]},{\"@type\":\"WebSite\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\",\"name\":\"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"description\":\"Search and read the latest judgements, orders, and rulings from the Supreme Court of India and all High Courts. A comprehensive database for lawyers, advocates, and law students.\",\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\"},\"alternateName\":\"Free judgements of Supreme Court & High Court of India | Legal India\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"SearchAction\",\"target\":{\"@type\":\"EntryPoint\",\"urlTemplate\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/?s={search_term_string}\"},\"query-input\":{\"@type\":\"PropertyValueSpecification\",\"valueRequired\":true,\"valueName\":\"search_term_string\"}}],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\"},{\"@type\":\"Organization\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\",\"name\":\"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"alternateName\":\"Legal India\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\",\"logo\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/logo\\\/image\\\/\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/sites\\\/5\\\/2025\\\/09\\\/legal-india-icon.jpg\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/sites\\\/5\\\/2025\\\/09\\\/legal-india-icon.jpg\",\"width\":512,\"height\":512,\"caption\":\"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/logo\\\/image\\\/\"},\"sameAs\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.facebook.com\\\/LegalindiaCom\\\/\",\"https:\\\/\\\/x.com\\\/Legal_india\"]},{\"@type\":\"Person\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\",\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"image\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"caption\":\"Legal India Admin\"},\"sameAs\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\",\"https:\\\/\\\/x.com\\\/legaliadmin\"],\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/author\\\/legal-india-admin\"}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"Orissa Public Service Commn.& Anr vs Rupashree Chowdhary & Anr on 2 August, 2011 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","robots":{"index":"index","follow":"follow","max-snippet":"max-snippet:-1","max-image-preview":"max-image-preview:large","max-video-preview":"max-video-preview:-1"},"canonical":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/orissa-public-service-commn-anr-vs-rupashree-chowdhary-anr-on-2-august-2011","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Orissa Public Service Commn.& Anr vs Rupashree Chowdhary & Anr on 2 August, 2011 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/orissa-public-service-commn-anr-vs-rupashree-chowdhary-anr-on-2-august-2011","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2011-08-01T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2018-09-29T00:23:36+00:00","og_image":[{"width":512,"height":512,"url":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg?fit=512%2C512&ssl=1","type":"image\/jpeg"}],"author":"Legal India Admin","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_creator":"@legaliadmin","twitter_site":"@Legal_india","twitter_misc":{"Written by":"Legal India Admin","Est. reading time":"8 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/orissa-public-service-commn-anr-vs-rupashree-chowdhary-anr-on-2-august-2011#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/orissa-public-service-commn-anr-vs-rupashree-chowdhary-anr-on-2-august-2011"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"Orissa Public Service Commn.& Anr vs Rupashree Chowdhary & Anr on 2 August, 2011","datePublished":"2011-08-01T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2018-09-29T00:23:36+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/orissa-public-service-commn-anr-vs-rupashree-chowdhary-anr-on-2-august-2011"},"wordCount":1595,"commentCount":0,"publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"articleSection":["Supreme Court of India"],"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"CommentAction","name":"Comment","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/orissa-public-service-commn-anr-vs-rupashree-chowdhary-anr-on-2-august-2011#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/orissa-public-service-commn-anr-vs-rupashree-chowdhary-anr-on-2-august-2011","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/orissa-public-service-commn-anr-vs-rupashree-chowdhary-anr-on-2-august-2011","name":"Orissa Public Service Commn.& Anr vs Rupashree Chowdhary & Anr on 2 August, 2011 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2011-08-01T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2018-09-29T00:23:36+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/orissa-public-service-commn-anr-vs-rupashree-chowdhary-anr-on-2-august-2011#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/orissa-public-service-commn-anr-vs-rupashree-chowdhary-anr-on-2-august-2011"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/orissa-public-service-commn-anr-vs-rupashree-chowdhary-anr-on-2-august-2011#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Orissa Public Service Commn.& Anr vs Rupashree Chowdhary & Anr on 2 August, 2011"}]},{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/","name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","description":"Search and read the latest judgements, orders, and rulings from the Supreme Court of India and all High Courts. A comprehensive database for lawyers, advocates, and law students.","publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"alternateName":"Free judgements of Supreme Court & High Court of India | Legal India","potentialAction":[{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/?s={search_term_string}"},"query-input":{"@type":"PropertyValueSpecification","valueRequired":true,"valueName":"search_term_string"}}],"inLanguage":"en-US"},{"@type":"Organization","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization","name":"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","alternateName":"Legal India","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/","logo":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg","contentUrl":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg","width":512,"height":512,"caption":"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/"},"sameAs":["https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","https:\/\/x.com\/Legal_india"]},{"@type":"Person","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea","name":"Legal India Admin","image":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","url":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","contentUrl":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","caption":"Legal India Admin"},"sameAs":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com","https:\/\/x.com\/legaliadmin"],"url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/author\/legal-india-admin"}]}},"modified_by":null,"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"jetpack_likes_enabled":true,"jetpack-related-posts":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/30385","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=30385"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/30385\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=30385"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=30385"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=30385"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}