JOGENDRA PANDA Vs. STATE OF ORISSA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioner, Jogendra Panda has come up before this Courtchallenging the order dated 26.4.2006 passed by the Orissa Administrative Tribunal,Cuttack Bench, Cuttack in T.A. No. 54/91.

(2.) AS it appears, the petitioner had filed a writ petition in the year 1988 and aftercoming into force of the Administrative Tribunal Act, the same was transferred to theOrissa Administrative Tribunal in the year 1991 and registered as T.A. No. 54 of 1991. The prayer of the petitioner before the Tribunal in the aforesaid T.A. No. 54 of 1991was to direct the opposite parties, i.e. the Secretary School & Mass EducationDepartment, the Director Elementary Education and the Inspector of Schools, JajpurCircle, to consider his case for appointment/promotion to the post of Headmastercomputing the seniority from the date of his training. The Tribunal by the impugnedorder dated 26.4.2006 (Annexure-1) disposed of T.A. No.54 of 1991 along with T.A. No.55 of 1991, filed by another teacher, namely, Abhiram Nanda, with a direction to theopposite parties to entertain and consider the representation of the petitioner forpromotion to the rank of Headmaster, if filed within one month from the date of receipt ofcopy of that order and pass appropriate orders within three months from the date ofreceipt of the representation. While disposing of the aforesaid Transfer Applications, theTribunal observed that acquisition of prescribed qualification, i.e. B.Ed is the onlyrelevant factor to be taken into consideration for the purpose of determining seniorityamongst the teachers belonging to Lower Subordinate Education Service (L.S.E.S.)cadre. The Tribunal further observed that in the case at hand, there was no allegation ifanybody who obtained B.Ed qualification later than the petitioner was promoted to thepost of Junior-S.E.S. Cadre on the basis of length of service pursuant to the circulars orResolution sought to be quashed. No counter affidavit was filed either in the earlier writpetition or in the Transfer Application, when the Tribunal adjudicated the case of thepetitioner. The petitioner has assailed the order of the Tribunal under Annexure-1 in this writapplication. According to him, his case is covered by the decision of this Court renderedin the case of P. Bengali Patro & 21 others v. State of Orissa and others, 104 (2007)CLT 102.