The High Court
Case Details
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK W.P.(C) No.19483 OF 2014 (An application under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India) Basanti Pattnayak … Petitioner -versus- State of Odisha & others … Opposite Parties Advocates appeared in the case through hybrid mode: For Petitioner : Mr.Sidheswar Mallik, Advocate -versus-
Legal Reasoning
For Opposite Parties : Mr.B.Mohanty, A.S.C (S & M.E. Deptt) --------------------------------------------------------------------------- CORAM: JUSTICE SASHIKANTA MISHRA JUDGMENT 15.2.2023. Sashikanta Mishra,J. The Petitioner has approached this Court with the following prayer; Page 1 of 6 “Under the aforesaid facts and circumstances the petitioner humbly prays that this Hon’ble Court may graciously be pleased to direct/order that the arrear salary of the petitioner from the date of joining i.e. on 2.12.1999 till November, 2010 shall be paid as per the bills submitted by the Managing Committee. Direct/Order the service period of the petitioner from 2.12.1999 till date shall be regularized with consequential service and monetary benefit including sanction of increment, revision of pay, seniority etc. and pass such other orders as may be deemed fit and proper in the interest of justice.” that 2. The facts of the case are that the Petitioner was appointed as an Asst. Teacher in the Jeypore Evangelical Lutheran Church (JELC), Primary School, Mujang in the district of Koraput vide order dated 22nd November, 1999. Her case along with two other Teachers were recommend to the District Inspector of Schools, Koraput by order dated 14th July, 2000 for approval. Such approval was accorded by order dated 10th July, 2001 by the District Inspector of Schools. Subsequently, by order dated 17th November, 2001, such approval was revoked on the ground that the appointment was made after the cut-off date i.e.,1st April, 1998 as per the instructions of the Government in their letter dated 6th May, 1998. By letter dated 30th March, 2007, the Management of the School wrote to the Director, Elementary Education with request to regularize the services of the Petitioner and for payment of her salary from W.P.(C) No. 19483 of 2014 Page 2 of 6 December, 1999 onwards. In the said letter it was, inter alia, mentioned as follows: xxx xxx xxx xxx Still the JELC Management “Sir, in undivided Koraput district is running about 33 Primary there are 12 vacancies of Schools. sanctioned teacher posts. In three education districts i.e. Koraput, Jeypore and Nabarangpur. The management is waiting for the approval of the Govt. to fill up the vacant posts but so far no order to fill up the vacant posts has been passed by the concerned govt. authorities since last two years as a result of which the posts could have not been filled up and there is acute shortage of teachers in the schools which hampers the education of students. Mrs. Basanti Pattanayak is a sincere, hard working and dedicated teacher who is still remain in the village Mujang of Koraput district and teaching students of that JELC Primacy School through not getting salary. It has become very essential looking at the need of teachers in JELC School, to impart education to the students in the backward KBK districts. Therefore, I request you to consider the case of Smt.Basanti Pattanayak BA, CT and her post may please be regularized and her salary be released as early as possible.” (Emphasis supplied) xxx xxx xxx xxx 3. By order dated 6th November, 2007 the fact of the Petitioner continuing to work in the School was acknowledged. Again by order dated 19th July, 2010, the appointment of the Petitioner was regularized and direction was issued to release grant-in-aid in her favour. The consequential order was passed by the Management on W.P.(C) No. 19483 of 2014 Page 3 of 6 10th August, 2010 along with submission of the bill for payment of arrear amount beginning from 2nd December, 1999 to 30th November, 2010. The bill as above was not honoured, for which the Petitioner approached this Court. 4. A counter affidavit has been filed wherein under paragraph-12, it is, inter alia, stated that the Petitioner may be entitled for salary from 6th December, 1999 to 17th November, 2001 but not for the period from 18th November, 2001 to 10th August, 2010 as she has not performed any duty for these periods. It is further stated that she had been paid salary from 11th November, 2001 to 30th November, 2010 without sanction of increments because of
Decision
pendency of the Writ Petition. 5. The Petitioner filed a rejoinder refuting such facts and specifically stating that she had discharged her duties continuously and is therefore, entitled to salary. An additional counter affidavit has been filed by the Opposite Party No.3 enclosing copy of the letter dated 18th July, 2007 of the Management wherein it is stated that the Petitioner has not performed her duties from 18th November, 2001 to 9th August, 2010 and therefore, her salary cannot be released. W.P.(C) No. 19483 of 2014 Page 4 of 6 6. Mr. S. Mallik, learned counsel appearing for the Petitioner, submits that the letter of the Management, enclosed to the Additional Counter Affidavit of Opposite Party No.3 as Annexure- A/3, runs contrary to its own letter dated 30th March, 2007, enclosed to the Writ Petition as Annexure-5. Mr. Mallik further submits that the said letter may have been obtained from the Management only to deprive the Petitioner from her legitimate dues. 7. Mr. B. Mohanty, learned Addl. Standing Counsel for the School and Mass Education Department, submits that the Management having stated that the Petitioner was not working during the relevant period, it is not possible for the authorities concerned to release her salary for the said period. 8. After hearing learned counsel for the Petitioner and on perusal of the documents on record, particularly the letters of the Management dated 30th March, 2007 and 18th July, 2017, this Court finds the Management to have taken an apparently contradictory stand as regards the engagement of the Petitioner during the relevant period. To amplify, while in the earlier letter it is stated that the Petitioner was working all through yet, in the subsequent W.P.(C) No. 19483 of 2014 Page 5 of 6 letter it is stated that she had not worked from 18th November, 2001 to 10th August, 2010. 9. Having regard to the disputed facts, which obviously cannot be decided by the writ court, the Writ Petition is disposed of with a direction to the Director, Elementary Education (Opposite Party No.2) to cause an enquiry to specifically ascertain the veracity of the claim of the Petitioner of having worked in the School during the period from 18th November, 2001 to 10th August, 2010. If it is found that she had in fact, rendered service during the period, immediate steps should be taken to release her dues for the said period considering the fact that she has retired since June, 2022. The entire exercise should be concluded within a period of two months from the date of communication of this order or on production of certified copy thereof by the Petitioner. It is open to the Petitioner to submit proof of her working during the relevant period before the Opposite Party No.2 for such purpose, if she so desires and in such event, the Opposite Party No.2 shall grant her necessary opportunity. ………..…….……………. Ashok Kumar Behera. Judge Sashikanta Mishra, W.P.(C) No. 19483 of 2014 Page 6 of 6 W.P.(C) No. 19483 of 2014 Page 7 of 6 W.P.(C) No. 19483 of 2014 Page 8 of 6 W.P.(C) No. 19483 of 2014 Page 9 of 6