CIVIL APPEAL 304 of 2015 on 1 March 2000

1. This matter is taken up through hybrid mode.

2. Pursuant to the order passed by this Court on 19.07.2024, learned Addl. Govt. Advocate produced the instruction so provided by the D.E.O., Cuttack vide his letter dtd.23.08.2024. The same be kept in record.

3. Heard Mr. S. Mallik, learned counsel appearing for the Appellant and Mr. S. Jena, learned counsel appearing for the State-Respondents.

4. The present appeal has been filed inter alia challenging order dtd.28.01.2020 so passed by the State Education Tribunal (in short Tribunal) in GIA Case No. 304 of 2015. Vide the said order claim of the Appellant for release of his salary in the shape of Grant-in-Aid for the period from 01.03.2000 to 30.04.2004 was rejected.

5. It is the case of the Appellant that the Appellant was appointed as a Teacher vide order dtd.28.02.2000 of the Managing Committee a Teacher vide order dtd.28.02.2000 of the Managing Committee

under Annexure-2. In terms of the said order Appellant joined as a Trained Graduate Teacher (PCM) on 01.03.2000 as reflected in Annexure-3.

6. It is contended that services of the Appellant was also approved w.e.f.01.03.2000 vide office order dtd.05.07.2011 under Annexure-5 of the then Inspector of Schools, Cuttack Circle, Cuttack in the scale of pay of Rs.5,000/- - 8,000/- with usual D.A..

6.1. It is contended that even though services of the Appellant was approved w.e.f.01.03.2000, but when he was not released with his salary for the period from 01.03.2000 to 30.04.2004 while complying the order passed by the Director on 26.10.2010 under Annexure-4 in Appeal Case No. 9/2001, Appellant on the face of the communications issued under Annexure-7 & 8, approached the Tribunal by filing GIA Case No. 304/2015.

6,2. It is contended that the Tribunal on the ground that the applicant was adjusted on 05.07.2011 in Emarti Devi Girls’ High School, Cuttack with a condition to draw his actual salary from the date of his joining, held the Appellant not entitled to get the benefit of salary in shape of Grant-in-aid for the period from 01.03.2000 to 30.04.2004.

6.3. Learned counsel appearing for the Appellant contended that since vide order dtd.26.10.2010 under Annexure-4 Respondent No. 2 permitted the Inspector of Schools to approve the appointment of the Appellant against the post of TGT (PCM) and in terms of the said order, services of the Appellant was approved w.e.f.01.03.2000 vide order dtd.05.07.2011 under Annexure-5, appellant is eligible and entitled to get the benefit of Grant-in-aid for the period from

01.03.2000 to 30.04.2004. It is accordingly contended that the Tribunal since without proper appreciation of the Petitioner’s claim, rejected the same vide the impugned order, the impugned order is not sustainable in the eye of law.

7. Considering the claim made by the Appellant and the order passed by the Tribunal, this Court passed the following order on 19.07.2024:- “2. Heard.

3. Considering the nature of dispute involved in this Appeal, learned Addl. Govt. Advocate is directed to obtain instruction as to whether any other teacher appointed in the school got the benefit of Grant-in-aid for the period from 01.03.2000 to 30.04.2004, as it is not disputed that the school was declared as an aided educational institution w.e.f.01.06.1994.

4. As requested by Mr. S.K. Samal, learned Addl. Govt. Advocate, list this matter on 09.08.2024.”

8. Pursuant to the order so passed learned Addl. Govt. Advocate basing on the instruction so provided in Court today, contended that nobody was working as against the post in question for the period from 01.03.2000 to 30.04.2004, even though the School in question was brought under the fold of Grant-in-aid w.e.f.01.06.1994.

9. Having heard learned counsel appearing for the Parties and considering the submissions made and the instruction provided by the D.E.O. vide letter dtd.23.08.2024, this Court is of the view that the Tribunal without proper appreciation of the Appellant’s claim, rejected his claim to get the benefit of salary in the shape of Grant-in-aid for the period from 01.03.2000 to 30.04.2004.

9.1. Therefore, this Court is inclined to quash order dtd.28.01.2020 so passed by the Tribunal in GIA Case No. 304 of 2015. While quashing the same, this Court directs Opp. Party No. 3 to take effective step for release of the Grant-in-aid in favour of the Appellant for the period from 01.03.2000 to 30.04.2004 as due and admissible within a period of three (3) months from the date of receipt of this order.

10. The appeal is accordingly disposed of.

Sneha

(BIRAJA PRASANNA SATAPATHY)

Judge

Signature Not Verified

Digitally SignedSigned by: SNEHANJALI PARIDAReason: AuthenticationLocation: High Court of Orissa, CuttackDate: 03-Sep-2024 12:31:26