The High Court
Case Details
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK W.P.(C) No.19253 of 2019 Laxmi Narayan Pattnaik …. Petitioner Mr. S.K. Das, Advocate State of Odisha and Others -versus- …. Opposite Parties Mr. M.K. Balabantaray, AGA CORAM: JUSTICE BIRAJA PRASANNA SATAPATHY ORDER 23.10.2024 Order No. 04. 1. This matter is taken up through Hybrid Arrangement (Virtual/Physical) Mode.
Legal Reasoning
2. Heard Mr. S.K. Das, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. M.K. Balabantaray, learned Addl. Govt. Advocate for the State. 3. Petitioner has filed the present Writ Petition inter alia challenging the impugned communication issued by the O.P. No.3 on 16.03.2019 under Annexure-6. Vide the said order, claim of the petitioner to get the benefit of RACP in the shape of 1st, 2nd and 3rd RACP was rejected only on the ground that petitioner does // 2 // not have the required qualification in terms of the Govt. Resolution issued on 18.02.2008. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioner contended that petitioner was appointed as an Assistant Teacher, Hindi where he joined on 21.12.1988 as found from Annexure-1. 4.1. It is also contended that while so continuing, petitioner acquired the required training qualification on 15.07.1997 and accordingly he was extended with the benefit of trained scale of pay w.e.f. 15.12.1997. Not only that taking into account the date of acquisition of the training qualification, petitioner was extended with the benefit of ACP w.e.f. 15.12.2012. But when he was not extended with the benefit of RACP in terms of Finance Department Resolution dated 06.02.2013, petitioner raised a claim to get the said benefit. But the same was rejected by the O.P. No.3 vide the impugned communication dated 16.03.2019 under Annexure-6. 4.2. It is contended that claim of the petitioner was rejected in view of the Resolution issued by the Govt. on 18.02.2008 which prescribes that a Hindi Teacher will be treated at par as a Trained Graduate Teacher if the concerned Hindi Teacher possesses the qualification of B.A. (KOVID) with required training qualification. Page 2 of 5 // 3 // 4.3. It is contended that petitioner admittedly does have the required training qualification and having acquired the same on 15.07.1997 with due extension of the trained scale of pay w.e.f. 15.12.1997, the stipulation contained in Resolution dated 18.02.2008 cannot be made application to his case. 4.4. It is accordingly contended that the impugned rejection on the ground indicated in Annexure-6 requires interference of this Court. 5. Mr. M.K. Balabantaray, learned Addl. Govt. Advocate on the other hand placing reliance on the counter affidavit filed by O.P. No.3, contended that since in terms of the Resolution issued by the Govt. on 18.02.2008, petitioner does not have the required Training Qualification, he became ineligible to get the benefit of RACP. The stand taken in Para-10 and 11 of the counter affidavit reads as follows:- “10. That, in Sl. No.14 of Govt. Resolution No.IX- S.M.E(H.C)-63/02/3424/S.M.E/dated18.02.2008. Continuance qualification it is clearly indicated that, of Hindi Teacher with lesser “The Hindi Teachers continuing at present in different Government, Aided and Block Grant High Schools with lesser Qualification shall continue as usual with their their of retirement/resignation/death/acquisition common qualification.” scale own pay till of (The copy of the Govt. Resolution dated 18.02.2008 is enclosed here with as Annexure-A/3.) Page 3 of 5 // 4 // 11. That, the proposal for allowing of RACP in favour of the petitioner was placed in the District level screening committee on dated 30.07.2015 at serial No.130. But it was not considered by the committee for financial up-gradation due to the minimum qualification of the post i.e. common qualification for the post of Hindi Teacher of High in Govt. Resolution School No.3424/S.M.E/dated 18.02.2008. As the aforesaid revised common qualification has been introduced prior to 01.01.2013. The petitioner is not entitled for financial up-gradation under RACP as the minimum qualification of the post not acquired by the petitioner. already communicated to the concerned Headmaster vide this office order No.18501/dated13.11.2015.” prescribed aforesaid decision The as 6. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and considering the submissions made, this Court finds that petitioner was appointed as an Assistant Hindi Teacher, where he joined on 21.12.1988. It is not disputed that petitioner taking into account his date of joining as 21.12.1988 and the acquisition of the Training Qualification on 15.07.1997, was allowed the benefit of Trained Graduate Scale of Pay w.e.f. 15.12.1997 and was extended with the benefit of ACP w.e.f. 15.12.2012 i.e. on completion of 15 years of service. But claim of the petitioner to get the benefit of RACP was rejected relying on the Resolution issued by the Govt. on 18.02.2008 under Annexure-A/3 to the counter affidavit. This Court after going through the resolution, finds that Hindi Teacher with having B.A. with KOVID and the required training qualification, became eligible to get the benefit of Trained Graduate Scale of Pay. Page 4 of 5 // 5 // 6.1. Since in terms of the Resolution and the fact that petitioner was extended with the benefit of Trained Graduate Scale of Pay on his acquisition of Training Qualification on 15.07.1997 w.e.f. 15.12.1997 and the benefit of ACP w.e.f. 15.12.2012 on completion of 15 years of service, as per the considered view of this Court, petitioner is eligible and entitled to get the benefit of RACP in terms of the Resolution dated 06.02.2013 and taking into account his date of eligibility as 15.12.1997. This Court accordingly while quashing the impugned order dated 16.03.2019 so passed under Annexure-6 directs O.P. No.3 to extend the benefit of RACP taking into account his date of entitlement/eligibility as 15.12.1997 and extend the benefit as due and admissible along with differential entitlements. This Court directs O.P. No.3 to complete the entire exercise within a period of 4 (four) months from the date of receipt of this order. 7.
Decision
The Writ Petition is accordingly disposed of. (Biraja Prasanna Satapathy) Judge Page 5 of 5 Basudev Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed Signed by: BASUDEV SWAIN Designation: SR. STENO Reason: Authentication Location: High Court of Orissa, Cuttack Date: 28-Oct-2024 11:32:31