Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation

2024 Supreme(Ori) 14

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA
Sashikanta Mishra, J.
Girija Shankar Mohapatra & Ors. - Appellants
Versus
State of Odisha & Ors. - Respondents
W.P.(C) No. 30343 of 2020 & W.P.(C) No. 633 of 2022 (Applications under Articles 226 and 227 of Constitution of India.)
Decided On : 17-05-2024

Mr. Sameer Kumar Das, P.K. Behera & N. Jena, Advocates. (In W.P.(C) No. 30343 of 2020), Mr. Kunal Kumar Swain, K. Swain & J.R. Khuntia, Advocates (In W.P.(C) No. 633 of 2022), For the Petitioners; Mr. S.N. Pattnaik, Addl. Government Advocate. Mr. B. Routray, Sr. Advocate with M/s. Prabhat Ku. Dash, R. Kanungo & S. Nanda, Advocates (for O.P.No.4 in W.P.(C) No.30343/2020), Mr. Sameer Kumar Das, P.K. Behera & N. Jena, Advocates. (for O.P.No.4 in W.P.(C) No.633/2022), For the Opp. Parties

IMPORTANT POINT
The court established that in the absence of a governing body, a Special Officer appointed under the Orissa Education Act has the authority to initiate disciplinary proceedings, and the Director can approve draft charges against an employee, thereby ensuring that no legal vacuum exists for disciplinary actions.

Headnote:
Writ Applications - Disciplinary Action in Educational Institutions - Orissa Education Act, 1969; Orissa Education (Recruitment and Conditions of Service of Teachers and Members of the Staff of Aided Educational Institutions) Rules, 1974 - The court analyzed the provisions of the Orissa Education Act, particularly Sections 7 and 7-A, which govern the appointment of special officers and the dissolution of governing bodies in educational institutions. It interpreted that the Sub-Collector, appointed as a Special Officer, had the authority to initiate disciplinary actions in the absence of a governing body. The court also clarified that the Director of Higher Secondary Education could approve draft charges against an employee, thus validating the disciplinary process initiated against Girija Shankar Mohapatra. The court emphasized that the absence of a governing body does not create a legal vacuum for disciplinary actions.
Fact of the Case:
The case involves two writ applications concerning the appointment and disciplinary actions against Girija Shankar Mohapatra and Harihar Pati at Sirigida Anchalika Bigyan Higher Secondary School. Mohapatra, serving as Principal-in-charge, faced disciplinary charges initiated by the Sub-Collector, who was appointed as a Special Officer after the dissolution of the governing body. Pati, the senior-most lecturer, sought to be appointed as Principal-in-charge, challenging Mohapatra's position.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the Sub-Collector had the authority to prepare draft charges against Mohapatra and that the Director's approval of these charges constituted valid disciplinary action. The court ruled that the absence of a governing body did not prevent the initiation of such actions, and Mohapatra's removal from the Principal-in-charge position did not amount to a penalty under the relevant rules.
Issues: 1. Whether the writ applications were prematurely filed. 2. Whether the Sub-Collector, as Special Officer, was competent to frame draft charges against an employee. 3. Whether the Director was competent to initiate disciplinary proceedings in the absence of a governing body. 4. Whether Mohapatra could challenge the competence of the Sub-Collector.
Ratio Decidendi: The court held that the Sub-Collector, appointed as Special Officer, had the authority to initiate disciplinary proceedings in the absence of a governing body, and the Director was competent to approve draft charges. The court emphasized that the process followed was valid and did not violate any legal provisions.
Final Decision: Both writ applications were dismissed, affirming the legality of the disciplinary actions taken against Girija Shankar Mohapatra and the authority of the Sub-Collector and Director in the matter.

JUDGMENT

Sashikanta Mishra, J.

Both these writ applications involve same facts for which they were heard together and are being disposed of by this common judgment.

2. The petitioner in W.P.(C) No. 30343 of 2020 has filed the writ application seeking the following relief:

'Under the above circumstances, it is therefore humbly prayed that the Hon'ble Court be graciously pleased to quash the order dtd: 22.10.2020 and dtd: 06.11.2020 of the Opposite Party No.2 under Annexure- 10 and 11 respectively and direct the opposite parties not to interfere in the functioning of the present petitioner as Principal-in-charge of the College;

And further the Hon'ble Court be pleased to quash the draft charge dtd: 25.08.2020 under Annexure-11-A as it is illegal without jurisdiction and authority;

And/ or pass any other writ/ writs, order/ orders/ direction/ directions in the fitness of the case.

And for this act of kindness as in duty bound the petitioner shall ever pray. '

3. The petitioner in W.P.(C) No. 633 of 2022 has filed the writ application seeking the following relief:

'Under the above circumstances, it is humbly prayed that the writ petition may be allowed;

And

(A) a writ of mandamus or an appropriate writ may be issued commanding the opposite parties more particularly the Sub-Collector-cum-Special Officerin-Charge of the Governing Body of Anchalik Vigyan Higher Secondary School, Sirigida opposite party No.3 to appoint the petitioner as Principal-in-Charge of the Higher Secondary School in question as he is the senior most Lecturer of the said Higher Secondary School and he is also senior to opposite party No.4 in all respect i.e. in length of service as well as in age and the appointment of the petitioner as Principal-in-Charge of the Higher Secondary School in question may be approved by the Director, Higher Secondary Education, Odisha, Bhubaneswar basing upon the order dated 06.11.2020 of the Director, Higher Secondary Education, Bhubaneswar Odisha, under Annexure: 17 and the appointment and approval of opposite party No.4 and his further continuance against the post of Principal-in- Charge of the Higher Secondary School in question may be declared illegal and bad in law, within a time to be stipulated by this Hon'ble Court;

(B) And any other order / orders or direction/directions may be issued so as to give complete relief to the petitioner;

And for this act of kindness, the petitioner shall as in duty bound remain ever pray.

4. The petitioner in W.P.(C) No.30343 of 2020 is opposite party No.4 in W.P.(C) No. 633 of 2022 and the petitioner in W.P.(C) No. 633 of 2022 is opposite party No.4 in W.P.(C) No. 30343 of 2020. For convenience, parties are referred to by their names.

FACTS

5. The facts, which are common to both the writ applications, are as follows:

5.1. Sirigida Anchalika Bigyan Mahavidyalaya was established in the year 1992 with +2 Science class and received recognition from the academic session 1992-93. It received Block Grant under the Grant-in-Aid Order, 2008 w.e.f. 20.01.2009. The name of the institution was changed by the Government to Sirigida Anchalika Bigyan Higher Secondary School, Sirigida, vide notification dated 27.06.2011.

5.2. Girija Shankar Mohapatra was appointed as Lecturer in Chemistry of the College on 29.05.1994 and joined as such on 30.05.1994. Harihar Pati was appointed as Lecturer in Botany on 25.11.1993. Appointment of both Lecturers and other staff of the College were approved as per order dated 08.07.2011 of the Director, Higher Secondary Education, Odisha. By order dated 08.07.2011, the Sub-Collector was directed to nominate the name of the senior most approved teacher to function as Principal in charge. Harihar Pati being the senior most submitted his written unwillingness citing personal difficulty. The next senior being one Sabita Sahoo, Lecturer in English, also submitted her written unwillingness. Both of them recommended the name of Girija Shankar Mohapatra in their written unwillingness. Accordingly, the Su