The High Court
Case Details
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK WP(C ) No.26674 of 2022 Lalita Biswal …. -versus- Petitioner Mr. S. Mishra-1, Adv. State of Odisha & Others …. Opposite Party Mr. S.K. Jee, AGA . CORAM: JUSTICE BIRAJA PRASANNA SATAPATHY ORDER 09.05.2025 Order No. 2. 1. This matter is taken up through Hybrid Arrangement (Virtual/Physical) Mode.
Legal Reasoning
2. Heard learned counsel appearing for the parties. 3. The present Writ Petition has been filed inter alia challenging order dt.18.11.2021 passed by Opp. Party No.2 under Annexure-19. Vide the said order, claim of the Petitioner in terms of the earlier order passed by this Court on 22.03.2021 in W.P.(C ) No.22296 of 2011 was rejected. 4. It is the case of the Petitioner that in terms of the letter issued that the District Project Coordinator, Bolangir-Opp. Party No.4 on 19.12.2003 under Annexure-7, Petitioner submitted her joining as an // 2 // Education Volunteer on 03.01.2004 which was duly received by the President or the Centre in question under Annexure-8. However, on the face of such acceptance of her joining, Petitioner when was not allowed to discharge her duty, Petitioner moved an application before Opp. Party No.3 on 14.02.2004 under Annexure-9. 4.1. It is contended that on the face of the grievance raised before Opp. Party No.3 under Annexure-9, no action was taken in allowing the Petitioner to continue as an Education Volunteer in the school in question. Because of such inaction on the part of the Opp. Parties, Petitioner was not only deprived to continue as Education Volunteer, but also she was deprived to get the benefit of being engaged as Gana Sikshyak in terms of resolution dt.16.02.2008 so issued by the Government-Opp. Party No.1 under Annexure-10. 4.2. It is also contended that persons engaged as Gana Sikshyak in terms of Resolution dt.16.02.2008 in the meantime have been regularized as Level-V Asst. Teacher. It is contended that because of the latches on the part of the Opp. Parties, Petitioner was not only deprived to continue as an Education Volunteer, but also she was deprived to continue as a Gana Sikshyak and subsequently as a Level-V Asst. Teacher. 4.3.
Legal Reasoning
It is contended that when no action was taken to consider the Petitioner’s grievance, Petitioner Page 2 of 6 // 3 // approached this Court by filing W.P.(C ) No.22296 of 2011 with a prayer to direct the Opp. Parties to allow her to continue a Gana Sikshyak in the School where she had joined on 03.01.2004 or in any other primary School under Patnagarh block in the district of Bolangir by treating the Petitioner as a disengaged Education Volunteer. This Court placing reliance on a similar order on similar issue passed in W.P.(C ) No.19260 of 2010,
Decision
Anita Sahoo Vs. State of Orissa & Others disposed of the Writ Petition vide order dt.22.03.2021 under Annexure-17 inter alia with the following direction. xxx xxx xxx “In the above view of the matter, the writ application stands disposed of with the direction to the Collector, Balangir to consider the case of the Petitioner, who stands on similar footing with Anita Sahoo, in terms of the order dt.28.07.2010 passed in W.P.(C ) No.19260 of 2009 by this Court Anita Sahoo V. State of Orissa & Others) and grant all consequential benefits as due and admissible to the Petitioner in accordance with law within a the date of four months period of communication of this order. from Xxx xxx xxx 4.4. Learned counsel appearing for the Petitioner contended that on the face of the specific direction issued by this Court in order dt.22.03.2021, there was no occasion on the part of Opp. Party No.2 to reject the Petitioner’s claim with passing of the impugned order dt.18.11.2021 under Annexure-9. It is also contended that order of dt.22.03.2021 was never assailed by the State and accordingly Opp. Party No.2 was required to extend the benefit as directed. But on Page 3 of 6 // 4 // the face of such clear-cut direction of this Court, claim of the Petitioner was rejected on the ground that Petitioner has not taken any step to join as an Education Volunteer in the Centre in question. 4.5. Learned Counsel appearing for the Petitioner accordingly contended that the impugned order is not sustainable in the eye of law and Petitioner is eligible and entitled to get benefits all through. 5. Learned Addl. Govt. Advocate on the other hand while supporting the impugned order made his submission basing on the stand taken in the counter affidavit. 5.1. It is contended that the Petitioner since has never joined as an Education Volunteer nor took any steps for her joining as such, Petitioner is not eligible and entitled to get the benefit of engagement as a Gana Sikshyak. It is also contended that claim of the Petitioner is barred by time. 6. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and considering the submission made, this Court finds that pursuant to the order issued by the District Project Coordinator-Opp. Party No.4 on 19.12.2003 under Annexure- 7, Petitioner joined as an Education Volunteer on 03.01.2004 in the School in question with due acceptance of the same under Annexure-8. On the face of such acceptance of her joining as an Education Volunteer on 03.01.2004, when she was not allowed to discharge her duty, she made a grievance before Opp. Party No.3 on 14.02.2004 under Annexure-9. Page 4 of 6 // 5 // But on the face of such grievance made by the Petitioner under Annexure-9, no step was taken in allowing the Petitioner to discharge her duty in terms of Annexure-7 and the joining letter submitted under Annexure-8. 6.1. Since in the meantime by abolishing the scheme of engagement of Education Volunteer, Govt. decided vide resolution dt.16.02.2008 under Annexure-10, to engage all those disengaged Education Volunteers as Gana Sikshyak, Petitioner was not extended with the said benefit. Accordingly, Petitioner seeking extension of the benefit of engagement as a Gana Sikshyak approached this Court by filing W.P.(C) No.22296 of 2011. This Court vide order dt.22.03.2021 under Annexure-17 while disposing the Writ Petition held that Petitioner stands in a similar footing as like the Petitioner in W.P.(C ) No.19260 of 2009. While holding so, this Court directed the Opp. Parties to continue her claim and to grant all consequential benefits as due and admissible to the petitioner in accordance with law. 6.2. It is the view of this Court that on the face of such direction issued by this Court in order dt.22.03.2021 which was never assailed by the State, there was no occasion on the part of Opp. Party No.2 to reject the Petitioner’s claim vide the impugned order dt.18.11.2021 under Annexure-9 on the ground indicated therein. The ground taken by Opp. Party No.2 in the impugned order that Petitioner never took any step to join as Education Volunteer and so taken by the learned Addl. Govt. Advocate is not acceptable on the face of Page 5 of 6 // 6 // the joining letter submitted and duly accepted under Annexure-8 and the grievance raised by the Petitioner under Annexure-9 6.3. Since for the admitted latches on the part of the Opp. Parties, Petitioner was not allowed to discharge her duty as Education Volunteer and accordingly was deprived her from being engaged as an Education Volunteer and thereafter as a Level-V Asst. Teacher, this Court while quashing the impugned order dt.18.11.2021 directs Opp. Party Nos.2 & 4 to extend the benefit as due and admissible to the Petitioner from the stage of her engagement as Education Volunteer till her regularization as a Level-V Asst. Teacher with all consequential service and financial benefits. 6.4. This Court directs Opp. Party Nos.2 & 4 to complete the entire exercise within a period of three (3) months from the date of receipt of this order. The Writ Petition accordingly stands disposed of. sangita Judge (Biraja Prasanna Satapathy) Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed Signed by: SANGITA PATRA Reason: authenticaton of order Location: high court of orissa, cuttack Date: 17-May-2025 18:44:10 Page 6 of 6