Research › Search › Judgment

Orissa High Court · body

2018 DIGILAW 573 (ORI)

State Of Orissa v. Sri. Prasanta Kumar Padhi

2018-05-17

D.DASH

body2018
JUDGMENT D. Dash, J. - The State of Orissa and the Director of Higher Education as the appellants have filed this appeal under section 24-C of Orissa Education Act, 1969 (for short, 'the Act') challenging the judgment dated 12.12.2013 passed by the learned State Education Tribunal, Bhubaneswar in GIA Case No. 276 of 2012 in the matter of a proceeding initiated by the respondent No. 1 under section 24 (B) of the Act. 2. The case of the respondent no. 1, who is the petitioner in GIA Case No. 276 of 2012 is that Tusra Degree College. Tusra in the district of Bolangir was established in the year 1991 and permission as required under section 5 of the Act was applied for. The appellant No. 2 vide office orders dated 09.09.1991 extended the permission with effect from the Academic Session 1990-91. It is stated that the College being a Degree College, the concerned University also extended its provisional affiliation with effect from Academic Session 1992-93 and thereafter, the State Govt, extended its temporary permission under section 6 (6) of the Act from the Academic Session 1993-94. The University granted its permanent affiliation by letter dated 15.09.2006. The State Govt, by letter dated 07.07.2004 granted permanent recognition from the academic session 2003-04. The petitioner having been duly selected has been appointed as a Physical Education Teacher by the governing body which was communicated by letter dated 23.10.1999 issued by the Secretary, Tusra Degree College. Pursuant to that letter of appointment, on 26.10.1999, he joined in the said post When the petitioner was continuing to serve a Physical Education Teacher in the said Degree College, notification dated 16.03.2011 was issued by the State Govt, declaring the Tusra Degree College as an Aided Educational Institution in terms of section 3 of the Orissa Education Act read with para-7 of Odisha (Non-Govt. Colleges, Junior Colleges and Higher Secondary: Schools) Grant-in-Aid, Order, 2008 (for short, 'GIA Order, 2008') entitling the teaching and non-teaching staff of that Tusra Degree College to receive the Block Grant as per that Order. It is further stated that pursuant to said notification, the appellant no. 2 in its letter dated 19.04.2011 though indicated the names of the teaching and non-teaching staff of Tusra Degree College as eligible to come within the fold of grant-in-aid in terms of GIA Order, 2008, the petitioner's name did not find place therein. It is further stated that pursuant to said notification, the appellant no. 2 in its letter dated 19.04.2011 though indicated the names of the teaching and non-teaching staff of Tusra Degree College as eligible to come within the fold of grant-in-aid in terms of GIA Order, 2008, the petitioner's name did not find place therein. There lies the grievance of the petitioner, f or the same, the respondent no. 1 filed the above noted GIA case before the Tribunal praying for a direction to the opp. party no.2 for according approval of his service as Physical Education Teacher in that Tusra Degree College and for release of Block Gran t in his favour in terms of GIA Order, 2008. The appellants have chosen not to file any counter in the said GIA case before the Tribunal. The Tribunal has finally allowed the GIA case and has held the petitioner to be eligible to receive Block Grant in accordance with the GIA Order, 2008 with effect from 20th January, 2009 which is now impugned in this appeal. 3. Learned Addl. Govt. Advocate inviting the attention of this Court to para-10 read with clause 4 of Annexure-II of the GIA Order, 2008 submitted that the prescribed yardstick is that one post of P.E.T. shall be eligible for every Aided Educational Institution. He however submitted that where a Junior College or Higher Secondary School and a Degree College have been separately notified as Aided Educational Institution, but are functioning as two wings of the same Institution, one post of P.E.T. would be eligible for approval for both the Junior College or Higher Secondary vying and Degree wing of that Institution. Therefore, he contended that here though Junior College or the Higher Secondary wing and the Degree College have been separately notified as Aided Educational Institutions but as those are functioning as two wings of the same Institution, one post of PET is eligible for approval for both the wings of that Institution for which the service of the petitioner as Physical Education Teacher in the Degree wing of the Institution has not been approved and that is wholly right in consonance with the law holding the field. According to him, the Tribunal has overlooked this aspect and therefore the judgment as has been rendered IS unsustainable in the eye of law and the claim of the petitioner being untenable, ought not to have been allowed by the Tribunal. He thus urged to set the impugned' judgment at naught. 4. Learned counsel for the respondent no. 1 submitted that position of law is no more res integra that the concept of composite college is a misnomer and that is not contemplated under the Orissa Education Act, 1969 read with Orissa Education (Establishment - of Recognition and Management of Private Junior Colleges/Higher Secondary Schools) Rule 1991. In support of the same, he placed reliance on the decision of this Court in the cases of Governing Body of Abhimanyu Samanta Singhar College, Balia v. State of Orissa and others under W.P.(C) No. 22530 of 2012 decided on 08.04.2016 and Anil Kumar Mohanty v. State of Orissa and others; 2016 (I) OLR 665 . It was further submitted that this respondent no. 1 no where including that very GIA application has admitted that the Junior College or Higher Secondary School and the Degree College are functioning as two wings of the same Institution and in fact the Regional Director after verification had recommended the case of the petitioner for approval of his service as Physical Education Teacher in the Degree College. He also submitted that if one goes through the orders of affiliation given by the Sambalpur University, the recognition given by the Director from time to time as also the permanent affiliation given by the University, it would be clear that Tusra Degree College has been recognized as such and it is not so, as the Degree wing of one Educational Institution. In this connection, he also referred to the order of the appellant no. 2 inapproving the service of teaching and non-teaching staff in terms of GIA Order 2008 as the teaching and non-teaching staff of Tusra Degree College and not for the Degree wing of one Educational Institution. 5. In this connection, he also referred to the order of the appellant no. 2 inapproving the service of teaching and non-teaching staff in terms of GIA Order 2008 as the teaching and non-teaching staff of Tusra Degree College and not for the Degree wing of one Educational Institution. 5. In view of the above rival submission, for proper appreciation, it would be profitable for us to take note of the relevant para-10 of GIA Order, 2008 reads as under: "xxx xxx xxx (a) the post is admissible as per workload and yardstick prescribed in this Order as at Annexure-II; and xxx xxx xxx" Let us now come to para-4 of Annexure-II with which we are concerned. It reads that : "One post of P.E.T. shall be eligible for approval for every Aided Educational Institution, Where a Junior College or Higher Secondary School and a Degree College have been separately notified Aided Educational Institution, but functioning as two wings of the same institution, one post of P.E.T. would be eligible for approval for both the Higher Secondary wing and the Degree wing of that institution". The concept of composite college is nowhere contemplated under the Act and the Rules. The appellants before the Tribunal in that GIA case has never been raised the above question so as to assert the correctness of the order of non-approval of service of the respondent No. 1 and other consequential benefits in terms of GIA Order, 2008. No such material has been placed either before the Tribunal or before this Court to conclude that Tusra Degree College has been functioning as one of the wings along with the other wing i.e. Tusra Junior College or Higher Secondary School of one Educational Institution having no distinct or separate existence. It has nowhere been so indicated in all the orders passed by the Authorities from time to time, in respect of the Degree College and nothing also finds mention therein that Tusra Degree College is one wing of that Educational Institution which has also the other wing of Junior College or Higher Secondary School. For the first time, it has been raised in this appeal that to, without any foundation or being supported by any such material/s. For the aforesaid, the submission of learned Addl. Govt. Advocate cannot be countenanced with. For the first time, it has been raised in this appeal that to, without any foundation or being supported by any such material/s. For the aforesaid, the submission of learned Addl. Govt. Advocate cannot be countenanced with. Thus this Court is unable to find any fault with the final outcome of the GIA Case in granting the reliefs to the respondent No. I. The appeal is accordingly dismissed.