JUDGMENT :

B.S. Chauhan, C.J. - This appeal has been filed by the appellant against the judgment and order dated 10.4.2001 passed by the learned Single Judge by which the writ petition of the appellant to provide the benefit of, grant-in-aid scheme to her after completion of three years from the date of sanction of the post has bean rejected.

In fact appellant claims the benefit from the date one year before the date the institution, where appellant is serving, itself has been granted the benefit of the grant-in-aid scheme.

2. The facts and circumstances giving rise to the case are that one Indira Gandhi Women's College was established in the year 1978. It was duly recognized by the State Government from the academic session 1979-80 and got affiliation with Utkal University in the year 1983-84 academic session. Earlier, there had been only one post of Oriya Lecturer, the second post in the said subject was created on 1.12.1984 by the resolution of the Government Body of the college. The State Government took a policy decision in 1985 that non-Government Women's Colleges would be entitled to receive the grant-in-aid benefit after 3, 5 and 7 years at the rate of 1/3rd, 2/3rd and full salary respectively for their admissible staff. As the first post of Oriya language become vacant in 1986, one Smt. Basabadutta Pattnaik working in the second post was adjusted on the first post and appellant- petitioner was appointed against the second post vide letter dated 27.2.1986, and she joined the service on 1.3.1986. The institution came under the Scheme of grant-in-aid w.e.f. 1.6.1988. Appellant claims that her appointment to the post of Lecturer in Oriya language was approved by the Governing Body of the College vide resolution dated 27.6.1991. with effect from 1.3.1986 i.e. the date of her joining in service.

3. Appellant's grievance is that vide order dated 11.3.1997 she had been given the benefit of grant-in-aid with effect from 1.6.1990 though she ought to have been given the said benefit on completion of three years from the date of sanction i.e. with effect from 1.6.1987 as the post stood created with effect from 1.6.1984. As the relief was not granted to her she filed the writ petition merely on the ground that normally in all other Women's colleges this has been the procedure. Therefore, she is entitled to get the grant-in-aid from 1.6.1987.

Learned Single Judge by his well discussed judgment rejected appellant's claim on the ground that the benefit of grant-in-aid scheme for the first post in Oriya language had been granted in the similar manner and neither the institution nor the occupant of the post had ever raised any grievance in this regard, thus, no relief can be granted to the appellant-petitioner. Hence this appeal.

5. Sri P. Acharya, learned Counsel appearing for the appellant has reiterated all the submissions which had been advanced before the learned Single Judge; case of the petitioner is not to be examined in the light as how the benefit of the scheme was granted in respect of the first post. It is to be examined in view of the practice prevailing for grant-in-aid principle for women's colleges and as in all women's colleges it had been granted on expiry of three years from the date of sanction of the post, the appellant is entitled to get the benefit thereof with effect from 1.6.1987 and the appeal deserved to be allowed.

5. Learned Standing Counsel appearing for the Respondent-State has vehemently opposed the appeal contending that the matter has to be decided on the basis of statutory provisions and not on the basis of prevailing practice for the reason that practice may be in contravention of statutory provisions.

6. More so, the appellant-petitioner could not be granted that benefit for the reason that she had not acquired any right to the post on 1.6.1987 as she did not hold the post in substantive capacity at all. In case the institution came under the grant-in-aid scheme w.e.f. 1.6.1988, the appellant cannot claim t