Research › Search › Judgment

Orissa High Court · body

2005 DIGILAW 634 (ORI)

Surjyanarayan Bisoyi v. State of Orissa

2005-10-26

A.K.SAMANTARAY, B.P.DAS

body2005
JUDGMENT B. P. DAS, J. — The petitioner, who is continuing as Junior Librarian in K.S.U.B. College, Bhanjanagar, has filed this writ application praying for a direction to the opposite parties to re-designate his post as Assistant Librarian with effect from 22.11.1994 in the pay scale of Rs.1400-2300/- and with effect from 1.1.1996 in the revised scale of pay and give him the conse¬quential benefits and release the same within a time frame. 2. The brief facts, as narrated in the writ petition, tend to reveal that the petitioner was initially appointed as a Junior Clerk, which is a Management post, on 3.8.1985 by the Governing Body of K.S.U.B. College, Bhanjanagar, admittedly a non-Government Aided Educational Institution. Initially, one Smt. Jharana Mohanty was appointed as Assistant Librarian in the College and after her promotion to the post of Librarian with effect from 22.11.1994, the Governing Body of the College in its Resolution No.5 dated 4.4.1998 appointed the petitioner, who was a Graduate in Arts and Bachelor in Library Science, as Assistant Librarian with effect from 22.11.1994 against the vacant D.P. post considering his qualification and experience in service. The yardstick for non-teaching staff prescribed for Libraries of the non-Government Colleges are one Graduate Librarian with Diploma in Library Science, one Assistant Librarian and one Li¬brary Attendant. The Director of Higher Education (opposite party No.2) by Office Order No.18821 dated 31.3.1999 accorded approval to the appointment of the petitioner in the post of Junior Li¬brarian in the scale of pay of Rs.975-1660/- with effect from 22.11.1994. The grievance of the petitioner is that as per the yardstick prescribed vide Annexure-3, the petitioner’s appointment should have been approved against the post of Assistant Librarian in the scale of pay of Rs.1400-2300/-, but he has been deprived of the said benefit due to the reasons not known to him. This is the cause of action for which the petitioner has filed the present writ petition. 3. In course of hearing, Miss. Misra Ghose, learned coun¬sel for the petitioner, draws our attention to Annexure-3, which is the yardstick and is not disputed by learned Addl. Standing Counsel and the yardstick prescribed one Librarian, one Asst. Librarian and one Attendant for an aided educational institution having strength of more than 1500 and up to 2500 students. 3. In course of hearing, Miss. Misra Ghose, learned coun¬sel for the petitioner, draws our attention to Annexure-3, which is the yardstick and is not disputed by learned Addl. Standing Counsel and the yardstick prescribed one Librarian, one Asst. Librarian and one Attendant for an aided educational institution having strength of more than 1500 and up to 2500 students. Annex¬ure-1 indicates that the students strength of the College in the year 1994 was 2136 and the same goes uncontroverted. Now the question arises whether the petitioner is entitled to get approv¬al to the post of Asst. Librarian. 4. A counter affidavit has been filed by opposite party No.2 While rebutting the claim of the petitioner made in the writ petition, it is candidly admitted in paragraph 4 of the said counter affidavit as follows :- “xx xx xx The yardstick prevail upon one Graduate Librarian and one or two Assistant Librarian depending on the roll strength of the College. In the instant case since there is a Graduate Librarian an Assistant Librarian may be appointed. Since the petitioner was continuing as Junior Librarian being duly approved and is in receipt of the salary component appropriate of the post, there¬fore the averments made in this paragraph has no relevancy at the present context.” At the same time, it is further stated in the counter affi¬davit that the Principal of the College has not submitted any proposal for re-designation of the petitioner’s post of Junior Librarian as Assistant Librarian till date and, therefore, the claim of the petitioner for re-designation of the post of Junior Librarian as Assistant Librarian is not maintainable. That apart, in paragraph 8 of the counter, Opposite Party No.2 has stated that as and when proposal in this regard will be received in the Directorate, action as deemed fit and proper will be taken for re-designating the post as Assistant Librarian keeping in view the Rules and Circulars of the Government in vogue. 5. That apart, in paragraph 8 of the counter, Opposite Party No.2 has stated that as and when proposal in this regard will be received in the Directorate, action as deemed fit and proper will be taken for re-designating the post as Assistant Librarian keeping in view the Rules and Circulars of the Government in vogue. 5. While hearing this matter on 24.8.2005 our attention was drawn to the letter dated 5.12.1998 annexed to the additional affidavit filed by the petitioner as Annexure-6 wherein the Directorate of Higher Education, Orissa recommended the case of the petitioner for approval of his appointment as Assistant Li¬brarian and looking into the said document, this Court by its order dated 24.8.2005 directed opposite party No.1 to file an affidavit clarifying the reasons for which the appointment of the petitioner was approved as a Junior Librarian despite the fact that the Directorate of Higher Education has recommended his case to the Government by letter dated 5.12.1998 (Annexure-6) to approve the petitioner as an Assistant Librarian. In terms of the aforesaid order, an additional affidavit has been filed by oppo¬site party No.1 through the Deputy Secretary to Government of Orissa, Higher Education Department, disclosing therein that Smt. Jharana Mohanty, who was holding the post of Junior Librarian, was promoted to the post of Graduate Librarian with effect from 22.11.1994 and after promotion of Smt. Mohanty, the post of Junior Librarian (Direct Payment Post) fell vacant and the Gov¬erning Body of the College adjusted the petitioner against the post of Junior Librarian (Management Post) with effect from 22.11.1994. It is further disclosed that the letter dated 5.12.1998 issued by the Director recommending the case of the petitioner was a mistake which was subsequently rectified by letter dated 28.1.1999 by submitting revised proposal with recom¬mendation for approval of the appointment of the petitioner against the post of Junior Librarian in the said College and the Government after careful consideration of the proposal accorded approval to the appointment of the petitioner against the Direct Payment Post of the Junior Librarian vide letter dated 23.3.1999. At this point, learned counsel for the petitioner draws our attention to Annexure-8, which is the decision taken by the High Power Committee in its meeting held on 16.2.1996 wherein it was, inter alia, decided that “If the person holding the post of Librarian (irrespective of the actual designation) possesses a Degree and Diploma in Library Science he may be given the scale of pay of Rs.1400-2600/-. Similarly, a Librarian with a Degree but no Degree or Diploma in Library Science may be given scale of pay of Rs.1400-2300/- and a Librarian who is not a Graduate will have to be accommodated in the scale of Rs.975-1660/-”. Learned counsel for the petitioner then draws our attention to the deci¬sion rendered by this Court in OJC No. 14870 of 1999 (Pranaya Kumar Thatoi v. State of Orissa and others) on 5.7.2005 relying upon the aforesaid decision of High Power Committee. Miss. Ghose submits that apart from the aforesaid decision of this Court, several other incumbents have also got the benefit of the Resolu¬tion of the High Power Committee, as stated above. 6. Considering the above noted factors cumulatively, we are of the view that the stand of the O.Ps. that the petitioner cannot be appointed as Assistant Librarian as no proposal to that effect was submitted by the Governing Body, goes contrary to the Directorate's own document, i.e., letter dated 5.12.1998 (Annex¬ure-6), wherein it is disclosed that the Governing Body of the College in Resolution No.5 dated 4.4.1998 has adjusted and ap¬pointed the petitioner as Assistant Librarian from 22.11.1994 against the vacant D.P. post considering his qualification and experience in service and ultimately the State Government was requested to place the matter before the High Power Committee to consider appointment of the petitioner as Assistant Librarian. Added to that, as there is no post of Junior Librarian, as indi¬cated in the decision taken by the High Power Committee, the question of adjusting and continuing the petitioner in the post of Junior Librarian absolutely does not arise and the decisions of the Higher Power Committee in Annexure-8, relevant part of which is quoted above, shows tha a conscious decision was taken by the Government to come to a rationality that irrespective of actual designation if the incumbent possesses a Degree and Diploma in Library Science he will be given the scale of pay of Rs.1400-2600/- and in the present case the petitioner was a Graduate with Degree in Library Science at the time of entering into the serv¬ice. 7. For the reasons indicated above, as the petitioner’s case is squarely covered by the Resolution in Annexure-8, we allow this writ petition and direct the opposite parties to fix the scale of pay of the petitioner in the scale of pay of Assist¬ant Librarian from 22.11.1994 and pay the arrear differential salary within a period of six months from the date of receipt of this order. A. K. SAMANTARAY, J. I agree. Petition allowed.