The High Court
Case Details
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK W.P.(C) No. 7918 of 2018 Applications under Articles 226 & 227 of Constitution of India. Binodini Senapati ...… Petitioner --------------- -Versus- State of Odisha and Others ..… Opp. Parties Advocate(s) appeared in this case:- _______________________________________________________ For Petitioner : M/s. L.K. Mohanty & B.K. Jena, Advocates For Opp. Parties : Mr. S.N. Patnaik,
Legal Reasoning
[Addl. Government Advocate] Mr. A. Mohanty, Advocate (Intervenor) _______________________________________________________ CORAM: JUSTICE SASHIKANTA MISHRA SASHIKANTA MISHRA, J. JUDGMENT 8TH August, 2024 I.A.No. 13244 of 2019 1. This is an application for intervention by four persons claiming to be staff of the institution. It is stated that they also have a stake in the matter. Page 1 of 9 2. Considering the submissions, prayer for intervention is allowed. The petitioners of this I.A. are directed to be impleaded as Opposite Party Nos. 5, 6, 7 and 8. 3. Mr. Mohanty undertakes to file consolidated cause title in course of the day. 4.
Decision
The I.A. is disposed of ……..………………….. Sashikanta Mishra, Judge W.P.(C) No. 7918 of 2018 1. Mr. Purna Chandra Sethi, the District Education Officer, Mayurbhanj is present in the Court and files an affidavit as directed. The delay in furnishing the required information to the office of the Advocate General has been explained in paragraphs-4 and 5 of the affidavit, which is quoted herein below:- “4. That, it is humbly submitted that the aforesaid order passed by this Hon’ble Court was communicated by the office of the Advocate General, Odisha, Cuttack vide Letter No.3064 dated 12.07.2024 through E- Despatch on 12.07.2024, but by mistake the person who are dealing with the Computer Section have not downloaded the copy of said letter and for which the Opp. Party No.3 was not aware about the order passed by this Hon’ble Court. Therefore, when the matter was listed 01.08.2024, the Opp. Party No. 3 Page 2 of 9 was unable to provide the instructions as directed by this Hon’ble Court, four which its serious this Hon’ble Court expressed displeasure regarding non-submission of necessary instruction by the Opp. Party No. 3 and accordingly this Hon’ble Court directed for personal appearance of the Opp. Party No. 3 on 08.08.2024 and to file an affidavit explaining why he had not furnished the required information to the State Counsel as required by this Hon’ble Court. 5. That, it is humbly submitted that the aforesaid order dated 01.08.2024 was also communicated by the office of the Advocate General, Odisha, Cuttack through E-Despatch on 05.08.2024. But the office of the Opp. Party No.3 has downloaded the earlier letter dtd. 11.07.2024 issued by the office of the Advocate General, Odisha on 02.08.2024 and on the very same day the letter issued by the office of the Advocate General, Odisha dated 12.07.2024 so also order passed by this Hon’ble Court dated 11.07.2024 was placed before the Opp. Party No.3. The Opp. Party No.3 immediately on the very same day called for explanation from the concerned Data Entry Operator, Sr. Assistant of the office of the District Education Officer, Mayurbhanj so also explanation who called from the Diarist and the ADEO of the office of the District Education Officer, Mayurbhanj, regarding delay in downloading the letter issued by the office of the Advocate General, Odisha, Cuttack.” 2. Sri Sethi, who is present in person, further submits that the concerned Data Entry Operator, namely, Debabrata Mahakud has been asked to show cause and Page 3 of 9 the Senior Assistant-Pinaki Behera has been asked to show cause as to why they downloaded the letters issued by the office of the Advocate General belatedly. Prima facie, this explanation is not acceptable for the reason that the office of the District Education Officer cannot be expected to be run on the whims and fancies of the junior level employees like the Data Entry Operator and Senior Assistant. This presents a sorry state of affairs, which the higher authorities should take note of. This Court therefore, directs the Collector, Mayurbhanj to look into the matter and ensure that the orders of this Court are strictly complied with in future and also to take appropriate action against the persons responsible for such inordinate delay in complying with the order of this Court in future. 3. Sri Sethi is directed to be more careful in future and to exhibit due promptitude in complying with the orders of this court henceforth. Since Sri Sethi has begged unconditional apology in the affidavit, the same is accepted and the personal attendance of Sri Sethi is dispensed with. Page 4 of 9 4. As regards the query posed by this Court regarding reconstitution of the Managing Committee, it is mentioned at paragraph-7 of the affidavit that the Managing Committee of the School was reconstituted way back on 03.02.2010. Subsequently, a proposal for constitution has been submitted by the Managing Committee on 12.10.2012 but no action has been taken as yet. In so far as the query relating to the present status of the institution vis-(cid:224)-vis the disturbances are concerned, it is stated under paragraph-10 that there are two groups in the school which has led to several litigations before different forums between the said two groups. Further, it is stated that one group is headed by the present petitioner and the other by Smt. Jyotsna Mohanta. The affidavit be kept on record. The writ petition is taken up for final disposal on consent of the learned counsel for the parties. 5. Heard Mr. L.K.Mohanty, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr.S.N. Patnaik, learned Addl. Government Advocate for the State. Page 5 of 9 6. The petitioner has approached this Court with the following prayer:- “It is therefore prayed that this Hon’ble Court may graciously be pleased to issue notice to the Opp. Parties calling upon them to file show cause as to why the order dt. 28.03.2018 under Annexure-18 shall not be quashed and after hearing the parties the parties this Hon’ble Court be pleased to quash the order dt. 28.03.2018 under Annexure-18. A further direction be issued to the opposite parties not to interfere in the Management of the School till reconstitution of the Managing Committee. And pass any other order/orders or direction/directions as this Hon’ble Court may deem just and proper. And for this act of kindness the petitioner as in duty bound shall ever pray.” 7. Though much has been pleaded and argued the basic dispute appears to be two-fold, which has apparently given rise to the order enclosed as Annexure- 18 to the writ petition. The first problem appears to be that despite expiry of the term of the Managing Committee way back in the year 2013, no steps have been taken as yet for its reconstitution. Though as per the affidavit filed today a proposal in such respect was submitted by the outgoing Managing Committee on 12.10.2012, it is highly Page 6 of 9 surprising that the matter has remained pending for so long. Secondly, the DEO, in the affidavit filed today, has clearly admitted that there are two groups in the school, one apparently led by the petitioner and the other by one Ms. Jyotsna Mohanta which has led to multiple litigations between them. 8. Mr. Mohanty, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the impugned order has caused serious inconvenience and difficulties for the staff inasmuch as the daily attendance register is now kept in the office of the BEO, Morada for which the staff have to go to the said office for the purpose of putting their signatures. Further, it has been directed that the in-charge-Headmaster will send monthly salary bill to the DEO, Mayurbhanj duly counter signed by the DEO, Morada. According to Mr. Mohanty all these riders put by the District Education Officer is causing difficulties in release of the current salary of the staff even though they have been rendering work in the institution. 9. Learned State Counsel also fairly submits that prompt steps need to be taken for reconstitution of the Page 7 of 9 Managing Committee as also for release of the current salary of the staff who are found to have been working in the institution. 10. In view of the rival submissions as noted above, the writ petition is disposed of by quashing Annexure -18 and by directing the Director of Secondary Education, Odisha (Opposite Party No.2) to take a decision with regard to reconstitution of the Managing Committee of the institution at the earliest and in any case not later than three months from today. Further, the Director shall issue necessary instructions to the District Education Officer, Mayurbhanj for facilitating endorsement of signatures on the attendance register by the staff of the institution as also for prompt release of their current salary dues which is said to have not been paid from 01.07.2023. The District Education Officer shall thereafter pass necessary orders to ensure that the institution runs smoothly and the staff are paid salaries without any hassle provided they have rendered work to the institution. Page 8 of 9 11. It is further stated that this Court in another writ petition, being W.P.(C) No.17040 of 2015, has already directed the DEO, Mayurbhanj to take a decision with regard to the reconstitution of the Managing Committee whereupon proposal has been sought for from the petitioner. The matter is pending as no proposal has been submitted so far. Such being the case, this Court directs the petitioner, as the Headmistress, to submit a fresh proposal for reconstitution of the Managing Committee in accordance with law, as early as possible, preferably within a month, to the DEO, Mayurbhanj for onward transmission to the office of the Director, who shall pass necessary orders thereon in accordance with law, within two months thereafter. 12. The writ petition stands disposed of in terms of observations as mentioned above. B.C. Tudu Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed Signed by: BHIGAL CHANDRA TUDU Designation: Senior Stenographer Reason: Authentication Location: Orissa High Court, Cuttack Date: 13-Aug-2024 19:56:57 ……..………………….. Sashikanta Mishra, Judge Page 9 of 9