Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK
KRISHNA S.DIXIT
Prasanna Kumar Dash – Appellant
Versus
State of Odisha – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. challenge to termination based on service abandonment (Para 1 , 2) |
| 2. court analysis supporting tribunal's ruling on appointment validity (Para 3) |
JUDGMENT :
DIXIT KRISHNA SHRIPAD, J.
Both these petitions, i.e., one by the employee and another by the Management of the Institution seek to call in question the judgment dated 17.05.2023 entered by the State Educational Tribunal in Appeal No.14 of 2007. This appeal was filed by private OP, namely, Susanta Kumar Sahoo under Section 24B of the Odisha Education Act, 1969 for laying a challenge to his removal from service.
2. FACTS IN BRIEF
(a) Petitioner Aided Institution had appointed the companion petitioner as Lecturer in Physics vide order dated 01.11.1993 against the existing vacancy. The said appointee had remained unauthorized absent during the period between 09.07.2001 and 01.07.2007, when his marital litigations were stated to be going on both before the Family Court & Criminal Court, of course, which eventually ended in a peace accord.
(b) During the above interregnum of absence, the private OP herein came to be selected & appointed to the eventual vacancy vide order dated 31.08.2002. This was preceded by a public a
Service abandonment for over five years warrants appointment of another candidate in the vacancy; prior approval for termination is mandatory.
Termination without due process and lack of proper notification constitutes a violation of natural justice principles, necessitating reinstatement.
Termination without the opportunity for a fair hearing violates principles of natural justice, reinforcing employee rights under the Constitution.
Cancellation of appointment after 19 years, without following proper disciplinary inquiry procedures, and based on a complaint, was unsustainable.
Long unauthorized absence from employment constitutes abandonment of service, justifying termination without reinstatement.
The Education Officer's order cancelling the approval to the petitioner's appointment was illegal and led to the petitioner's wrongful termination, warranting the court's intervention and relief to t....
The main legal point established in the judgment is the significance of documentary evidence and the management's decision in drawing reasonable judicial inferences regarding the appointment procedur....
Explicitly temporary fixed-term appointment for academic years, even against permanent vacancy, not deemed probationary under Section 5(2); no confirmation after two years; terminates automatically s....
The central legal point established in the judgment is that the termination of an employee's service in a Government Aided School/College without obtaining prior approval of the Competent Authority, ....
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
