Research › Search › Judgment

Orissa High Court · body

2011 DIGILAW 123 (ORI)

Ajoy Kumar Patra v. Stote of Orissa

2011-02-25

B.K.MISRA

body2011
ORDER Heard Learned Counsel for the parties. This Writ Petition is to be disposed of at the stoge of admission. The Petitioner prays for a direction to the Opp. Parties to pay Dearness Allowance to him at the same rate as is being paid to his counterparts with effect from 1.1.2001 within a stipulated period. The case of the Petitioner is that he has been appointed as Lecturer in English in Shramasakti College, Biramitrapur on 6.10.1982. The said post was approved & regularized by the Director, Higher Education, Orissa, Opp. Party No.2 with effect from 1.6.1986. Subsequently, the Petitioner was promoted to the post of senior lecturer with effect from 6.10.1994 & he became a Reader with effect from 6.10.2002. At present he has been working as Reader in English in Municipal College, Rourkela in the district of Sundaragarh. The scale of pay of the Petitioner was fixed in the revised scale of pay with effect from 1.1.1996. As his appointment has been duly approved by the Director Higher Education, Orissa, he is receiving his salary under the direct payment scheme of the Government as per Rule-9 of the Orissa Education (Recruitment & Conditions of Services of Teachers & Members of Stoff of Aided Educational Institution) Rule, 1974. It is also the case that pursuant to Revised Scale of Pay, 1998 the pay of the Petitioner has been fixed with effect from 1.1.1996. It is also the case that prior to 1.1.2001 the rate of Dearness Allowance paid to the Petitioner as well as the lecturers in the Government Colleges were same. But from 1.1.2001 onwards, the Dearness Allowance at a higher rate is being paid to the Stote Government employees including lecturers of Government Colleges, but the Petitioner is being deprived of such financial benefits with effect from 1.1.2001. The grievance of the Petitioner is that he is being discriminated on payment of Dearness Allowance in clear violation of the mandate of Rule 9 (in short the 1974, Rules). In support of his contention the Petitioner placed reliance on a decision of this Court reported in 2008(1) Orissa Law Review at page 890 Dr. Yudhistira Khatua. & Ors. v. Stote of Orissa & Ors. & another decision of this Court decided in W.P.(C) No. 880 of 2011 (Gokul Kishore Mohanty & thirty one others v. Stote of Orissa & ors). Rule 9 of 1974 Rule clearly speaks:" 9. Yudhistira Khatua. & Ors. v. Stote of Orissa & Ors. & another decision of this Court decided in W.P.(C) No. 880 of 2011 (Gokul Kishore Mohanty & thirty one others v. Stote of Orissa & ors). Rule 9 of 1974 Rule clearly speaks:" 9. Drawal of pay & allowances by employees of Aided Institutions - (1) Every employee of an Aided Educational Institution shall draw the same pay, dearness allowance & subsistence allowance in case of suspension as is admissible to counterpart in the Government educational institutions under the relevant rules applicable to him & shall ordinarily be paid in the month following the month to which the claim relates directly by Government or by any Officer or by any Agency authorized by Government". Similarly, Section 7-C of the Orissa Education Act, 1969 prescribes that the Stote Government shall within the limits of its economic capacity will set apart the money annually far being given as Grants-in-Aid to be provided to the private educational institutions of the Stote. Thus, an, plain reading of the provisions of Section 7-C of the Orissa Educational Act,1969 providing Grant-in-Aid has no nexus with regard to ,the payment of allowances like Dearness Allowance & there fare, the opp. Parties in my humble view cannot debar the Petitioner from getting enhanced Dearness Allowance & especially in view of the mandate of Rule 9 of the 1974 Rules which unequivocally speaks that the lecturer of aided educational institution shall be paid his dearness Allowance, subsistence Allowance in case of pension as is admissible to his counterparts in the Government Educational Institution. It is trite that the State Administration cannot shy away from its responsibility in treating the lecturer of the aided Educational Institution at par with his counter parts of the Government Educational Institution an the plea of financial stringency. Learned Counsel appearing far the State very fairly conceded to the aforesaid proposition of law & submitted that the case of the Petitioner is squarely covered by the Judgment of Dr. Judhistir Khatua & ors (supra) & that of Gokul Kishore Mohanty (supra). Taking into consideration the claim of the Petitioner & applying the position of law, the grievance of the Petitioner can be redressed by this Court. Accordingly, it is directed that the Opp. Judhistir Khatua & ors (supra) & that of Gokul Kishore Mohanty (supra). Taking into consideration the claim of the Petitioner & applying the position of law, the grievance of the Petitioner can be redressed by this Court. Accordingly, it is directed that the Opp. Parties to pay the Dearness Allowance to the Petitioner at the rate which is being paid to the lecturer of the Government College with effect from 1.1.2001 within a period of three months from the date of communication of this order & the arrear amount of Dearness Allowance payable to the Petitioner from 1.1.2001 shall be paid within the said period. Urgent certified copy of this order be granted on proper application. WP. Disposed of.