The High Court
Case Details
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK WP(C) No.18454 of 2023 Banita Mishra State of Odisha&Ors. Petitioner Mr. L.K. Mohanty, Advocate Opposite Parties Mr. S. Jena, AGA -versus- ..... CORAM:
Decision
ORDER 16.07.2024 Order No. 09 1. This matter is taken up through hybrid mode. 2. Heard Mr. L.K. Mohanty, learned counsel appearing for the Petitioner and Mr. S. Jena, learned Addl. Govt. Advocate appearing for the Parties. 3. Petitioner has filed the present writ petition inter alia challenging the communication issued by the Govt.-Opp. Party No. 1 on 03.02.2023 under Annexure-17. Vide the said communication claim of the Petitioner to get approval of her services as against the post of Headmaster of the School in question has been rejected. 4. Learned counsel for the Petitioner contended that Petitioner while continuing as an Asst. Teacher, in terms of the resolution passed by the School Management Committee on 13.12.2016 under Annexure-12, a decision was taken to adjust the Petitioner as against a Trained Graduate post. 4.1. It is contended that the aforesaid resolution passed by the School Management Committee was duly forwarded to the Govt.- Opp. Party No. 1 by the Director, Elementary Education-Opp. Party Page 1 of 4. No. 2 on 27.02.2019 under Annexure-16. It is contended that since there is no valid Managing Committee functioning in the school, the School Management Committee passed the resolution under Annexure-12 by allowing adjustment of the Petitioner as against the post of TGT. It is contended that even though claim of the Petitioner was duly recommended by Opp. Party No. 2 vide Annexure-16 basing on the recommendation made by the B.E.O., Cuttack Sadar under Annexure-15, but Opp. Party No. 1 illegally and arbitrarily rejected the claim vide the impugned communication dtd.03.02.2023 under Annexure-17. 4.2. It is contended that since the School was not having any valid Managing Committee, the School Management Committee so formed is competent to pass the resolution dt.13.12.2016 under Annexure-12 and the said proposal should have been accepted by the Govt.-Opp. Party No. 1 instead of rejecting the same vide Annexure-17. It is accordingly contended that rejection available at Annexure-17 is not sustainable in the eye of law. 5. Mr. S. Jena, learned Addl. Govt. Advocate on the other hand made his submission basing on the stand taken in the counter affidavit so filed by Opp. Party No. 4. Placing reliance on the guideline issued by the Govt.-Opp. Party No. 1 vide letter dt.11.01.2011 under Annexure-A/4, learned AGA contended that the School Management Committee so formed in terms of the guideline has no authority to pass any resolution adjusting the Petitioner as against the post of TGT. 5.1. Learned AGA brought to the notice of this Court the function of the School Management Committee as indicated under Para 2(c) of letter dtd.11.01.2011. It is accordingly contended that since the Page 2 of 4. School Management Committee is not authorized to pass any such resolution adjusting the Petitioner as against the post of TGT, Opp. Party No. 1 has rightly rejected the claim of the Petitioner for her approval as against the said Post. However, it is fairly contended that the School is not having any valid Managing Committee. 5.2. It is also contended that in the revised guideline issued by the Govt. under Annexure-B/4, the School Management Committee is not authorized to pass any such resolution as has been passed in the case of the Petitioner under Annexure-12. It is accordingly contended that no illegality or irregularity has been committed by Opp. Party No. 1 while rejecting the claim vide the impugned communication under Annexure-17. 6. Mr. M.R. Pradhan, learned counsel appearing for Opp. Party No. 5 though supported the resolution so passed by the School Management Committee under Annexure-12, but he failed to satisfy this Court with regard to the competency of the School Management Committee to pass the resolution in question in adjusting the Petitioner as against the post of TGT. 7. Having heard learned counsel appearing for the Parties and considering the submissions made, this Court finds that Petitioner while continuing as an Asst. Teacher, the School Management Committee of the School in its resolution dtd.13.12.2016 under Annexure-12 adjusted the Petitioner as against the post of TGT and the said proposal was initially forwarded by the B.E.O. vide his letter dtd.27.12.2018 under Annexure-15 and further forwarded by Opp. Party No. 2 vide his letter dtd.27.02.2019 under Annexure-16. Page 3 of 4. 7.1. Considering the functions available to be discharged by the School Management Committee in terms of the guideline issued by the Govt.-Opp. Party No. 1 on 11.01.2011 under Annexure-A/4 and revised guideline issued by the Govt. on 30.07.2014 under Annexure-B/4, this Court finds that, nowhere the School Management Committee is authorized to pass any such resolution with regard to adjustment of any employee as against any post. 7.2. Therefore, it is the view of this Court that the School Management Committee was not competent to pass the resolution in question in favour of the Petitioner adjusting her as against the post of TGT. It is also the view of this Court that in view of the guideline available under Annexure-A/4 & B/4, neither the B.E.O. nor the Director could have recommended the case of the Petitioner for consideration vide Annexure-15 and 16. 7.3. Therefore, this Court finds no illegality or irregularity with regard to the action of the Govt.-Opp. Party No. 1 in rejecting the proposal vide the impugned communication dtd.03.02.2023 under Annexure-17. However, while dismissing the writ petition, this Court observe that if the School is not having any valid Managing Committee, Opp. Party No. 4 is directed to take effective step for constitution and approval of the Managing Committee of the School in question within a short period by following the procedure as prescribed. 8. The writ petition is disposed of accordingly. Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed Sneha Signed by: SNEHANJALI PARIDA Reason: Authentication Location: High Court of Orissa, Cuttack Date: 19-Jul-2024 19:05:44 (BIRAJA PRASANNA SATAPATHY) Judge Page 4 of 4.