The High Court
Case Details
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK W.P.(C)(OAC) No.1176 of 2019 Jagannath Gardia …. Petitioner Mr. N. Rath, Advocate -versus- State of Odisha & Ors. …. Opposite Parties Mr. S. Jena, AGA CORAM: JUSTICE BIRAJA PRASANNA SATAPATHY
Decision
ORDER 19.01.2024 Order No 04. 1. This matter is taken up through Hybrid Arrangement (Virtual/Physical) Mode. 2. Heard Mr. N. Rath, learned counsel for the Petitioner and Mr. S. Jena, learned Addl. Govt. Advocate appearing for the Opp. Parties. 3. The Petitioner has filed the present writ petition inter alia challenging the order of reversion passed by the Opp. Party No. 2 vide his order dtd.04.06.2019 under Annexure-7. Vide the said order Petitioner was reverted to Level III in the elementary cadre, from which cadre he was earlier promoted vide order dtd.07.03.2019 under Annexure-5. It is contended that Petitioner basing on the recommendation made by the Directorate Level Committee held on 12.02.2019, was promoted to Level II and his name was reflected at Sl. No. 159 of order dtd.07.03.2019 under Annexure-5. 3.1. Pursuant to the said order, Petitioner was posted as Assistant Block Education Officer, Balishankara Block and he was relived to join in his promoted post vide office order dtd.27.05.2019 under // 2 // Annexure-5. Petitioner’s joining on 27.05.2019 was also accepted as revealed from office order dtd.04.06.2019 under Annexure-6. But thereafter, vide the impugned order dt.04.06.2019 under Annexure- 7, Petitioner was reverted to Level III. 3.2. It is the main thrust of argument of the learned counsel for the Petitioner that Petitioner since was duly promoted basing on the recommendation of the Directorate Level Committee vide order under Annexure-5 and he being a regular Govt. employee, no order of reversion could have been passed without following the principle of natural justice. In support of his submission, learned counsel for the Petitioner relied on the decision of this Court passed on 06.08.2021 in W.P.C.(OAC) No. 913 of 2017. This Court placing reliance on the decision of the Hon’ble Apex Court in a no. of cases held as follows in Para 16:- “16. Therefore, in view of the principles of law laid down by the apex Court, as referred to above, this Court is of the considered view that the impugned order of reversion in Annexure-3 dated 10.04.2017, so far as it relates to the petitioner, cannot sustain in the eye of law and the same is liable to be quashed and hereby quashed. The matter is remitted back to the authority concerned to reconsider the same and pass appropriate order by affording opportunity of hearing to the petitioner in compliance of the principles of natural justice.” 3.3. It is accordingly contended that the impugned order is not sustainable in the eye of law and requires interference of this Court. It is further contended that on the face of the interim order passed by the Tribunal on 20.06.2019, Petitioner was also not allowed to Page 2 of 5 // 3 // continue in his promotional post in terms of the order issued under Annexure-5 and consequential order issued on 27.05.2019 and 04.06.2019. 4. Mr. S. Jena, learned Addl. Govt. Advocate on the other hand made his submission basing on the stand taken by the Opp. Party No. 4 in his counter. It is contended that after being reverted vide order dtd.04.06.2019, Petitioner remained on unauthorized absence w.e.f.01.06.2019 till 03.11.2022. In the meantime, vide order dtd.03.11.20222 of Opp. Party No. 4, Petitioner has been posted as Level III Headmaster in Govt. U.P. School, Tangargaon. It is also contended that in terms of the order dtd.03.11.2022 Petitioner has joined as Level III Headmaster. It is accordingly contended that since after his reversion, Petitioner has accepted office order dtd.03.11.2022 by joining as Level III Headmaster, no further grievance is there to be adjudicated by this Court. 5. To the submission made by the learned AGA, Mr. Rath, learned counsel appearing for the Petitioner contended that on the face of the interim order passed by the Tribunal on 20.06.2019 when Petitioner was not allowed to continue in his promotional post, he was compelled to remain on leave w.e.f.04.06.2019. Taking into account the plight of the Petitioner, he had got no alternative than to accept office order dtd.03.11.2022 so issued by Opp. Party No. 4 under Annexure-A/4. However, it is contended that since the order of reversion has been passed in violation to the principle of natural justice, the same is not sustainable in the eye f law and the matter requires fresh adjudication by Opp. Party No. 2 by following the principle of natural justice. Page 3 of 5 // 4 // 6. Having heard learned counsel appearing for the Parties and after going through the materials available on record, this Court finds that basing on the recommendation made by the Directorate Level Committee held on 12.02.2019, Petitioner was promoted to the rank of Level II vide order dtd.07.03.2019 under Annexure-5. In terms of the said order, Petitioner was posted as ABEO, Balishankara Block, where he joined on 27.05.2019 and his joining was also accepted as reflected from office order dtd.04.06.2019 under Annexure-6. As per the considered view of this Court if it was found that Petitioner has been wrongly promoted, Petitioner should have been given an opportunity of hearing prior to taking any step to revert him vide office order dtd.04.06.2019 under Annexure-7. 6.1. Placing reliance on the decision as cited supra, this Court is of the view that principle of natural justice has not been followed while reverting the Petitioner vide the impugned order dtd.04.06.2019 under Annexure-7. The stand taken by the Opp. Party No. 4 in the counter that even if opportunity of hearing would have been given to the Petitioner, the same result would have occurred is not acceptable as prima facie Petitioner has been reverted without any prior show-cause. Since admittedly principle of natural justice has not followed prior to reverting the Petitioner, this Court is inclined to quash the order of reversion so far as it relates to the Petitioner vide office order dtd.04.06.2019 under Annexure-7. While quashing the said order, this Court remits the matter to Opp. Party No. 2 to take a fresh decision by giving due opportunity of hearing to the Petitioner. Such a fresh decision as directed be taken within a period of three (3) months from the date of receipt of this order. However, since in terms of order dtd.03.11.2022 vide Annexure-A/4 Petitioner Page 4 of 5 // 5 // has already joined as Level III Headmaster, further continuance of the Petitioner in the promotional post will be subject to the final decision to be taken by the Opp. Party No. 2 as directed. Till a fresh decision is taken, Petitioner will be allowed to continue as Level III Headmaster in terms of the order dtd.03.11.2022. 7. With the aforesaid observation and direction, the writ petition is disposed of. (Biraja Prasanna Satapathy) Judge Sneha Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed Signed by: SNEHANJALI PARIDA Designation: Sr. Stenographer Reason: Authentication Location: High Court of Orissa, Cuttack Date: 22-Jan-2024 19:53:20 Page 5 of 5