The High Court
Case Details
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK FAO Nos.508 of 2023 & 73 of 2022 Binita Dehury …. State of Odisha & Ors. …. -versus- Appellant Mr. M. Basu, Advocate Respondents Mr. P.K. Panda, ASC CORAM: JUSTICE BIRAJA PRASANNA SATAPATHY Order No. 10.
Decision
ORDER 28.02.2025 1. This matter is taken up through Hybrid Arrangement (Virtual/Physical) Mode. 2. Heard learned counsel for the parties. Memo containing Order dated 06.06.2023 so issued by the Respondent No.1, produced in Court be kept in record. 3. Since both the appeals have been filed challenging the common judgment dated 05.01.2022 so passed by the learned State Education Tribunal in GIA Case No.71 of 2018, both the appeals were heard analogously and disposed of by the present common order. 4. It is the main contention of the learned counsel for the appellant that decision taken by the department rejecting the proposal of the College for sanction of Block Grant in favour of the appellants in terms of the provisions contained under GIA Order, 2014, was // 2 // affirmed by the learned tribunal solely on the ground that in order to determine the admissibility of the posts held by the appellants under GIA Order, 2014, tutorial classes are to be excluded from consideration to fulfill the yardstick. 5. Placing reliance on an order issued by the Department on 06.06.2023, learned counsel for the appellants contended that while issuing such an order, Govt. took a decision that number of tutorial classes conducted for Higher Secondary Schools or Degree Colleges during the eligibility period, shall be taken into account for the purpose of determination of workload towards admissibility of additional post of Lecturer for approved optional subjects. Decision taken in the order dated 06.06.2023 reads as follows:- “Under Odisha (Non-Government Colleges, Junior Colleges and Higher Secondary Schools) Grant-in-aid Order, 2014, additional post of Lecturers for optional subjects are admissible on the basis of workload and for the purpose of determination of the total workload, the total number of classes in that optional subject are to be calculated as per para 1(v) of Annexure-II of said GIA Order. Doubts are made at the level of verification authority and clarification has been sought for as to whether tutorial classes shall be calculated while computing admissibility of additional post of Lecturers in the approved optional subjects. The matter has been examined keeping in view the provisions under Odisha Higher Secondary Education, Act, 1983 (for Higher Secondary Schools) and Regulations of different Universities (for Degree Colleges) prevailed during the period of eligibility as stipulated under GIA Order, 2014. Page 2 of 5 // 3 // In exercise of the powers conferred under Para 17 of GIA Order, 2014, Government, after careful consideration, have been pleased to decide that number of tutorial classes conducted in Higher Secondary Schools or Degree Colleges during the eligibility period shall be the purpose of into account for determination of workload towards admissibility of additional post of Lecturer in approved optional subjects. taken The Verifying Authority ensure authenticity towards conduct of tutorial classes from the concerned Principals while examining admissibility of posts. should Earlier clarifications, if any issued on this score is hereby superseded.” 5.1. Placing reliance on the aforesaid order, learned counsel for the appellants contended that the ground on which the GIA case was rejected vide the impugned judgment, while upholding the rejection made by the department is not sustainable in the eye of law. 6. Mr. P.K. Panda, learned Addl. Standing Counsel on the other hand placing reliance on the provisions contained under Rule-8(2) of the GIA Order, 2014 vis- (cid:224)-vis the yardstick prescribed for admissibility of the post, contended that since in the said order or in the yardstick there is no provision to take into consideration the tutorial classes for the purpose of determination of workload, no illegality or irregularity can be found with regard to the rejection originally made by the department, so upheld by the Tribunal in the impugned judgment dated 05.01.2022. Page 3 of 5 // 4 // 7. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and considering the submissions made, this Court finds that claim of the appellants to get the benefit of grant- in-aid under GIA Order, 2014 when was rejected inter alia on the ground by the Department that the work load does not permit admissibility of the posts, the matter was carried to the Tribunal in GIA Case No.711 of 2018. The Tribunal as found from the impugned judgment upheld the decision of the department inter alia on the ground that tutorial classes taken by the appellants cannot be taken into consideration for the purpose of determination of work load towards admissibility of such additional posts of lecturer in approved optional subjects. 7.1. Placing reliance on the order issued by the department on 06.06.2023 as indicated hereinabove, this Court is of the view that tutorial classes are also to be taken into consideration for determining the admissibility of the post. Therefore, the ground on which claim of the appellants has been rejected vide the impugned judgment is not sustainable in the eye of law. Therefore, this Court is inclined to quash order dated 05.01.2022 so passed by the Tribunal in GIA Case No.711 of 2018. While quashing the order, this Court remits the matter to the Tribunal to take a fresh decision on the claim of the appellants. It is observed that while taking such a decision, relevancy and effect Page 4 of 5 // 5 // of order dated 06.06.2023 be taken into consideration in its proper perspective. 7.2. Since the GIA case is of the year 2018, this Court directs the Tribunal to dispose of the matter by giving due opportunity of hearing to all concerned, within a period of 6 (six) months from the date of receipt of this order, if there is no other legal impediment. 8. Both the appeals are disposed of accordingly. (Biraja Prasanna Satapathy) Judge Basudev Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed Signed by: BASUDEV SWAIN Designation: SR. STENO Reason: Authentication Location: High Court of Orissa, Cuttack Date: 06-Mar-2025 18:48:38 Page 5 of 5