JUDGMENT

Though all these writ petitions have been listed for admission, but on the consent of the learned counsel for the parties, the same are taken up for final disposal.

We have heard Mr. B.Routray, learned Senior Counsel appearing for the petitioners in W.P.(C) No.14057 of 2013 and 14059 of 2013, Mr.S.K.Padhi, learned Senior Counsel appearing for the petitioner in W.P.(C) No.14062 of 2013 and Mr. Sangram Das, learned counsel for the State.

2. In all the writ petitions, challenge is being made to the order of transfer passed by the Director, Higher Education, Orissa, Bhubaneswar.

3. The case of the petitioners is that in absence of any cadre, as provided under Sec. 10 (C) of the Orissa Education Act, (hereinafter referred to as ‘Act’ for the sake of brevity), the impugned order is bad in law. It is further stated that though a specific provision has been provided under Sec.10 (C) of the Act to constitute a common cadre of lecturers of different subjects in the different colleges, but no common cadre has been constituted till now. It is further stated that transfer of an employee of an aided college is governed under a set of statutory rules i.e. Orissa Aided Educational Institutions Employees Common Cadre and Inter transferability Rules, 1979 (hereinafter referred to as ‘Rules’ for the sake of brevity). Rule 3 of 1979 Rules provides constitution of the common cadre. Rule 6 vests the power on the Director to transfer an employee of a common cadre in case of colleges. However, no common cadre has been constituted.

4. Pursuant to issuance of notice, opposite parties entered appearance and filed counter affidavit. The specific case of the opposite parties is that a common cadre of lecturers of all aided colleges of the State has been constituted by the State Government in exercise of the powers conferred by sub-Sec. (1) of Sec.10 (C) of the Act vide Government order dated 22.10.1982 under Annexure-A. The further case of the opposite parties is that once a cadre is constituted, all persons, who are subsequently appointed to the service, are automatically appointed to the cadre. It is further stated that all persons, who are appointed in aided colleges as lecturers in regular manner and are receiving Grant-in-Aid, are borne in the common cadre and, as such, any lecturer being within the said cadre is liable to be transferred.

5. Referring to the provisions of Sec.10 (C) of the Act and Rules 3 and 6 of the 1979 Rules, learned Senior Counsel appearing for the respective petitioners submit that since no cadre has been constituted till date, the order of transfer is bad in law and unworkable.

6. Per contra, learned counsel appearing for the State submits that a common cadre of lecturers of all the aided colleges of the State has been constituted way back on 22.10.1982 vide Annexure-A. Furthermore, all persons, who were subsequently appointed to the service, are automatically appointed to the cadre and any lecturer being within the common cadre, is liable to be transferred by the State Government under sub-sec. (6) of Sec.10 (C) of the Act as well as 1979 Rules.

7. On the rival submissions of the parties, really one point arises for consideration as to whether a common cadre of lecturers relating to the aided colleges of the State of Orissa has been constituted by the State Government in accordance with the provisions of Sec.10 (C) (1) of the Act and whether the petitioner, who has been appointed in an aided college as lecturer in a regular manner receiving Grant-in-Aid, is borne in the common cadre and liable to be transferred.

8. Though submissions of the learned Senior Counsel appearing for the respective petitioners at flash appears to be persuasive, but on a dipper scrutiny of the provisions of Sec.10 (C) (1) of the Act and Rules 3 and 6 of the 1979 Rules and the order dated 22.10.1982 vide Annexure-A, the same holds no water. In service jurisprudence, the term ‘cadre’ has definite legal connotation. The word ‘cadre’ is not synon