Back
'State Without Justice is Band of Robbers': Orissa HC Raps Authorities for Tormenting SC Teacher Over Two Decades
In a blistering judgment, the
dismissed the
's appeal against the reinstatement of Debendra Nath Malik, a Scheduled Caste teacher repeatedly disengaged despite spotless service and prior judicial clearances. The Division Bench of
Justice Krishna Shripad Dixit
and
Justice Chittaranjan Dash
not only upheld the single judge's order quashing the 2018 termination but imposed
of Rs 50,000 on the state, conditional on timely compliance. The court decried the "mindlessness and callousness" that forced Malik to fight multiple writs and contempts, quoting philosopher Jeremy Bentham:
"What is State without justice, but a band of robbers…"
From Merit List to Court Corridors: A 20-Year Ordeal
Debendra Nath Malik, a member of the Scheduled Caste, cleared the 2003 recruitment exam for Swechhasevi Sikshya Sahayak (SSS) posts under a notification reserving 16.25% (23 of 146 vacancies) for SC candidates. Ranked 18th (effective 12th after non-joiners) in the final select list dated , he joined UGUP School, Gualigaon, on .
Trouble began in 2006 when the disengaged him citing Hrushikesh Bindhani v. (2004), which quashed the original recruitment process. Malik's WP(C) 12278/2006 succeeded; the high court quashed the order and remanded for fresh consideration. After delays prompting contempt proceedings (CONTC 55/2008), the Collector re-engaged him on — explicitly noting Bindhani did not apply .
Yet, continuity was denied while others got it. Further writs (WP(C) 15038/2011, CONTC 2146/2012) led to undertakings and a 2012 rejection of service regularization. Shockingly, a 2013 show-cause notice invoked another case, followed by 2018 disengagement again on Bindhani grounds—despite 9+ years' service. This triggered WP(C) Nos. 12813/2016 and 19120/2018, culminating in the single judge's , quashing and reinstatement order.
State's Flip-Flops vs. Teacher's Resilience
The appellants— , , , , and —argued Malik's initial selection stemmed from the quashed 2003 process, and his rank fell beyond the SC cutoff. They claimed the single judge ignored these, warranting reversal.
Malik's counsel countered with his legitimate selection within reserved vacancies, prior Collector findings of non-applicability of Bindhani, and the agony of repeated litigation—six cases over 20 years—demanding for a downtrodden SC member.
As reported in legal circles, the state's " " reopens after court undertakings smacked of contempt, with the single judge labeling it " ."
Bench's Razor-Sharp Reasoning: Trumps Bureaucratic Whimsy
The Division Bench found no infirmity in the single judge's order. Key to its analysis: earlier remand findings (post-2007) that Bindhani inapplicable operated as , barring re-litigation without fresh notice. The 2018 disengagement, using the same precedent sans justification, was " ."
On merit, Malik ranked well within 15 advertised SC vacancies (effective after non-joiners), applied openly, and held valid SC status—no backdoor entry. The court invoked constitutional affirmative action for SCs, referencing Tagore, Ambedkar, and MLK Jr. on caste eradication, lamenting persistent discrimination:
"Case of the Respondent is one that of class. He was made to run to pillar to the post, on umpteen times."
Precedents like Hrushikesh Bindhani (quashed process but inapplicable here) and Ganeswar Sethi (2011, cited in notice) were distinguished—none justified repeated targeting.
Key Observations from the Bench
"The answering Appellants arbitrarily and capriciously had caused disengagement mindlessly applying the decision in Hrushikesh Bindhani supra, having earlier held it to be inapplicable, in so many words. ... findings recorded in the earlier orders pursuant to the remand ... would operate akin to ."
"A scrupulous member of downtrodden community was made to spend the prime of his youth in the Court corridors, that are not a happy place to hover. That cannot go unscathed."
"Such argument of the State counsel is absurd, imaginary and has no basis ... petitioner's position is coming at Serial No. 12 of the select list, which is well within the 15 advertised vacancy meant for SC category candidates."
"This shows not only theof the said authority, but also shows that the authorities are playing with the judicial proceedings of this Court ... Such conduct of the Collector isin nature."
Final Verdict: Reinstatement, Costs, and a Warning
The appeal (WA 1825/2024) stands dismissed. Malik gets reinstatement with full service/financial benefits from . The state must comply within eight weeks , or pay Rs 50,000 and face contempt. Web copy is operative.
This ruling reinforces protections against arbitrary service terminations, especially for reserved categories, signaling zero tolerance for bureaucratic harassment. It may embolden similar claims, urging authorities to honor judicial findings and undertakings.
Case:
