Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK
S.K. PANIGRAHI, J.
Akshya Kumar Nayak – Appellant
Versus
State of Orissa and Ors. – Respondents
W.P.(C) No.5480 of 2021 along with W.P.(C). Nos.7563 of 2022, WP(C) Nos.7565 & 7566 of 2022, WP(C) No.32699 of 2021, WP(C) No.36075 of 2020, WP(C) Nos.37953 & 37955 of 2020, and WP(C) Nos.28, 30, 31, 33, 34, 36, 37, 39, 40, 42, 79, 134, 353, 357, 359, 363, 389, 392, 396, 398, 400, 678, 679, 682, 684, 688, 689, 691, 692, 1160, 1164, 1576, 1579, 1582, 1587, 1589, 1592, 1634, 1637, 1916, 1918, 2531, 2675, 2676, 3283, 3285, 3287, 3381, 3383, 3384, 3386, 3387, 3389, 3390, 3391, 3393, 3684, 3685, 3686, 3687, 3894, 4158, 4160, 4161, 4163, 4164, 4165, 4166, 4168, 4169, 4170, 4172, 4173, 4174, 4176, 4180, 4181, 4182, 4183, 4184, 4197, 4350, 4352, 4353, 4600, 4601, 4602, 4684, 5313, 5315, 5317, 5321, 5322, 5324, 5432, 5433, 5434, 5435, 5436, 5437, 5439, 5440, 5441, 5442, 5443, 5445, 5446, 5447, 5449, 5450, 5451, 5452, 5453, 5457, 5458, 5459, 5460, 5461, 5462, 5463, 5464, 5465, 5466, 5467, 5468, 5469, 5470, 5471, 5472, 5473, 5474, 5475, 5476, 5478, 5479, 5481, 5482, 5485, 5486, 5487, 5489, 5490, 5492, 5612, 5614, 5616, 5619, 5621, 5623, 5624, 5626, 5627, 5629, 5632, 5634, 5637, 5640, 5766, 5767, 5768, 5769, 5770, 5771, 5883, 5884, 5886, 5887, 5889, 6017, 6278, 6388, 6389, 6390, 6391, 6392, 6393, 6394, 6395, 6396, 6397, 6398, 6596, 6597, 6598, 7075, 7077, 7080, 7082, 7083, 7341, 7343, 7344, 7350, 7351, 7352, 7627, 7628, 7629, 7630, 7631, 7632, 7633, 7634, 7635, 7691, 7731, 7806, 7954, 7955, 7956, 7957, 7958, 7959, 7988, 7989, 7991, 7992, 7993, 7994, 7995, 7997, 7998, 7999, 8000, 8002, 8003, 8004, 8006, 8008, 8009, 8013, 8015, 8017, 8036, 8482, 8483, 8484, 8485, 8499, 9404, 9406, 9408, 9419, 9420, 9421, 9423, 9424, 9425, 9426, 9427, 9428, 9430, 9431, 9432, 9433, 9434, 9435, 9436, 9437, 9440, 9445, 9446, 9459, 9461, 9462, 9463, 9464, 9466, 9467, 9469, 9470, 9473, 9484, 9487, 9489, 9628, 9631, 9633, 9635, 9640, 9645, 9647, 9648, 9650, 9652, 9654, 9777, 10217, 10218, 10220, 10222, 10224, 10227, 10228, 10230, 10232, 10234, 10236, 10242, 10243, 10246, 10247, 10248, 10251, 10253, 10254, 10256, 10258, 10262, 10263, 10655, 10656, 10716, 10717, 10814, 10815, 10816, 10817, 10818, 10819, 10820, 10821, 10822, 10823, 10824, 10825, 10826, 10827, 10828, 10830, 10831, 10833, 10834, 10863, 10864, 10868, 10869, 10871, 10921, 10922, 10923, 10924, 10925, 11249, 11251, 11254, 11280, 11282, 11284, 11329, 11332, 11335, 11337, 11349, 11366, 11615, 11618, 11621, 11797, 11799, 12236, 12237, 12239, 12240, 12241, 12242, 12243, 12244, 12245, 12517, 12518, 13388, 13592, 14298, 14299, 14302, 14305, 14529, 14830, 14832, 14833, 14834, 14835, 14836, 14837, 14838, 14839, 14840, 14841, 14842, 14843, 14844, 14845, 14846, 14847, 14848, 14849, 14852, 14853, 15229, 15231, 15233, 15236, 15238, 15241, 15243, 15245, 15248, 15249, 15250, 15251, 15252, 15253, 15254, 15255, 15256, 15881, 16546, 16553, 16929, 16930, 16931, 17001, 17003, 17004, 17006, 17007, 17317, 17601, 17603, 18386, 18441, 18481, 19002, 19003, 19005, 19006, 19008, 19260, 20367, 20368, 20370, 21258, 21902, 21904, 21906, 21908, 22067, 22209, 22210, 22341, 22731, 23249, 23483, 23485, 23492, 23863, 23864, 23865, 24674, 25260, 26055, 26056, 26060, 26062, 26065, 26066, 32667, 32668, 32682, 32703, 32706, 33327, 39949 and 41037 of 2021, along with W.P.(C) Nos. 1055, 1056, 4002, 4310, 4311, 4312, 5025, 6404, 6405, 6407, 6762, 8806 and 7621 of 2022 and W.P.(C) Nos. 2221, 211, 215, 628, 882, 884, 886, 888, 1110, 1112, 2252, 2254, 2257, 2259, 2261, 2264, 2514, 2515, 2587, 2589, 2591, 3113, 4063, 4064, 4065, 4066, 4121, 4518, 4798, 4812, 4815, 4817, 5133, 5139, 5142, 5144, 5148, 5224, 5412, 5414, 5553, 5556, 5557, 5560, 5562, 5563, 5565, 6539, 6909, 7074, 7338, 7339, 7340, 7342, 7345, 7346, 7347, 7348, 7349, 7353, 7508, 7509, 7510, 7601, 7692, 7693, 7694, 7695, 8012, 8283, 8357, 8361, 8628, 8629, 8726, 8729, 8733, 8737, 8741, 8745, 8748, 8751, 8754, 8756, 8759, 8762, 8764, 8820, 8821, 8928, 8934, 8941, 9264, 9266, 9269, 9271, 9442, 9578, 10106, 10340, 10341, 11794, 11934, 12521, 12523, 13006, 13059, 13273, 13275, 13686, 13688, 14604, 14611, 15018, 15025, 15122, 16061, 17455, 18677, 18995, 18998, 19432, 20155, 23573, 23575, 23577, 26101, 26351, 26901, 27964, 27965, 29131, 29141, 29706, 29707, 37508, 40617, 41373, 41375, 41845 & 41889 of 2021, and WP(C) Nos.139, 2569, 6043, 6538, 6583, 8397, 9207, 9963, 10169, 10170, 10172, 10173, 10175, 10176, 10178, 10179, 10180, 10183, 10184, 10186, 10188 & 10189 of 2022.
Decided on : 04-08-2022
Trained Graduate Scale of Pay - Qualification for Hindi Teacher - Odisha Education Act, 1969, Rules, 1974 - The petitioner, a Hindi Teacher, challenged the rejection of his claim for grant of Trained Graduate Scale of Pay on attaining the age of 48 years. The petitioner's school was notified to receive block grant, and he possessed a Bachelor's Degree, Shastri, and M.A. (Hindi). The Government issued resolutions prescribing common qualifications for Hindi Teachers. The petitioner contended that he was entitled to the Trained Graduate Scale of Pay as per Rule 16(2) of the Rules, 1974. The District Education Officer rejected his claim, citing a clarificatory order and lack of common qualification. The Court found that the petitioner possessed the minimum qualification mandated by the Government resolution and that the agitation of his claim was not barred by limitation. The Court allowed the claim, stating that all identically situated persons should be treated alike, and not doing so would amount to discrimination and violate Article 14 of the Constitution of India.
Fact of the Case:
The petitioner, a Hindi Teacher, challenged the rejection of his claim for grant of Trained Graduate Scale of Pay on attaining the age of 48 years. The petitioner's school was notified to receive block grant, and he possessed a Bachelor's Degree, Shastri, and M.A. (Hindi).
Finding of the Court:
The Court found that the petitioner possessed the minimum qualification mandated by the Government resolution and that the agitation of his claim was not barred by limitation. The Court allowed the claim, stating that all identically situated persons should be treated alike, and not doing so would amount to discrimination and violate Article 14 of the Constitution of India.
Issues: The issues determined by the Court were: i. Whether the petitioners possess the common qualification prescribed under Clause-10 of Resolution dated 18.02.2008? ii. Whether the Rule-16(2) of the Rules, 1974 shall be applicable in the present case overriding the qualifications fixed by the State Government in letter No.9270/SME dated 06.05.2014 issued by the Under-Secretary to Government? iii. Whether the petitioners’ reliance on the case of Radharani Samal (supra) can be considered valid when they have agitated their claim after the issuance of the clarification?
Ratio Decidendi: The Court found that the petitioner possessed the minimum qualification mandated by the Government resolution and that the agitation of his claim was not barred by limitation. The Court allowed the claim, stating that all identically situated persons should be treated alike, and not doing so would amount to discrimination and violate Article 14 of the Constitution of India.
Final Decision: The Court allowed the present Writ Petition as well as the connected batch of Writ Petitions, disposing of them with no order as to cost.
JUDGMENT :
Dr. S.K. Panigrahi, J.
1. Since similar questions of law or facts are involved in all the above writ petitions, all the matters were heard together. However, this Court felt it appropriate to decide W.P.(C) No.5480 of 2021 first and whatever the outcome of the said Writ Petition, the same will be covered to other similar writ petitions mentioned above.
I. Facts of the case:
2. The petitioner who is working as Hindi Teacher has filed W.P.(C) No.5480 of 2021 (hereinafter referred to as “the present writ petition” for brevity) challenging, inter alia, the order passed by the authority rejecting his claim for grant of Trained Graduate Scale of Pay on attaining the age of 48 years on the ground that the qualification possessed by him is not similar to the case of Radharani Samal v. State of Orissa, 2017(1) ILR-CUT-546, and, therefore, he is not entitled to get the benefit as has been made available to said Radharani Samal(supra) who is the petitioner in W.P. (C) No.18908 of 2013 disposed of on 24.11.2016. Therefore, the petitioner has approached this Court for seeking the aforesaid relief as extended in Radharani Samal (supra).
3. The averments made in the writ petition are that the school of the petitioner was notified to receive block grant with effect from 01.01.2004 as per Grant-in-Aid Order of 2004 read with Section 3(b) of Odisha Education Act, 1969 (hereinafter referred to as “the Act” for brevity). Therefore, the school of the petitioner is an aided educational institution within the meaning of Section 3(b) of the Act and as such the institution of the petitioner and its employees governed under the various rules framed under the Act and rules framed thereunder from time to time.
4. The petitioner after facing due process of selection having requisite qualification was appointed as Hindi Teacher by the Managing Committee of the school. Pursuant to the order of appointment, the petitioner joined the said post. After the school in question was notified to receive grant-in-aid from the State Government, his appointment was approved against the post of Hindi Teacher along with other members of the staff and he was allowed to avail block grant as per the Grant-in-Aid Order, 2004. Subsequently, the petitioner received grant-in-aid as per the Grant-in-Aid Order of 2017. So far as the qualification of the petitioner is concerned, he has passed B.A., Shastri, M.A (Hindi) examination.
5. The School and Mass Education Department, Government of Odisha issued resolution No.3424/S & ME dated 18.02.2008, wherein the post of Hindi Teacher has been upgraded to the status and scale of pay of Trained Graduate Teacher of Fully Aided, Block Grant and Recognized High Schools of the State with one identical scale of pay. Paragraphs 10, 11, 12 and 13 of the said Resolution dated 18.02.2008 which provide qualification, equivalency, up-gradation of existing posts of Hindi Teacher and fixation of pay for the post of Hindi Teacher in a High School irrespective of Government, Fully-Aided, Block Grant and recognized read as follows:
The minimum educational qualification for the post of Hindi Teacher in a High School Irrespective of Government, Fully Aided, Block Grant and recognized shall be as below. A Bachelor’s Degree from a Recognized University with Hindi as one of the elective subject or with Rastrabhasa Ratna from Rastrabhasa Prachar Samiti, Wardha or an equivalent Degree from a Recognized Institution and Hindi Shikshyan Parangat from Kendriya Hindi Sansthan; Agra/Hindi Teachers Training Certificate Course from Hindi Training Institutes, Cuttack, Bhubaneswar and Sambalpur.
11. The Hindi Teachers Training Certificate Course conducted by the Hindi Training Institute, Cuttack, Bhubaneswar and Sambalpur is declared as equivalent to Hindi Shikshyan Parangat vis-a-vis B. Ed. Degree of an Indian University for the purpose of employment.
12. Consequent upon fixation
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
