MANASI MANJARI MOHAPATRA Vs. STATE OF ORISSA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioner challenging the order of suspension passed by the Secretary of the Managing Committee of Satyasai Vidya Vihar in the district of Dhenkanal has filed O. J C. No. 5226 of 1996 and challenging the authority of the Managing Committee in initiating the disciplinary proceeding against her has filed O. J. C, No. 17277 of 1997.

(2.) THE case of the petitioner is that she was apointed as a Hindi Teacher in Satyasai Vidya Vihar on 21 9 1992 by the Managing Committee of the said institution. She joined in the post on 22 9 1992 and continued to discharge her duties till the order of suspension was passed. The school in question was notified by the State Government to receive grant in aid with effect from 1 6 1994 and became an aided educational institution within the meaning of section 3(b) of the Orissa Education Act, 1969. After the school was notified by the State Government to receive grant in aid, the Inspector of Schools called upon the Headmaster of the institution to submit the staff position for approval and accordingly the staff position was submitted by the Headmaster in which the name of the petitioner finds place as a Hindi Teacher. After receipt of the staff position by office order dated 20 9 1995 the Inspector of Schools approved the services of all the members of the staff excluding the petitioner. Subsequently by order dated 1 11 1995 the petitioner's appointment was approved as Hindi Teacher with effect from 1 6 1994. Shri Swain, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, submitted that with the change of status of the school which became an aided one with effect from 1 6 1994, the Managing Committee which was constituted for the unaided educational institution became defunct in the eye of law, as under rule 28 of the Orissa Education (Establishment, Recognition and Management of Private High School) Rules, 1991 after a school is declared t'o be an aided one, the Managing Committee is required to be reconstituted. Since no proposal was sent for reconstitution of the Managing Committee as provided under rule 28 of the aforesaid Rules, under the direction of the Director, the Inspector of Schools was kept in charge of the management of the said institution. When the Inspector of Schools was in charge of the institution, the ex Secretary of the Managing Committee vide order dated 4 12 1995 placed the petitioner under suspension pending drawal of the disciplinary proceeding against her. The said order is under challenge before this Court in O.J C. No. 5226 of 1996 Challenging the authority of the ex Managing Committee in initiating a disciplinary proceeding against the petitioner, O. J. C. No. 17277 of 1997 has also been filed. Shri Swain submitted that in view of appointment of the Inspector of Schools by the Director for management of the institution and in view of the fact that the school became an aided one, the previous Managing Committee of the unaided institution had became defunct and had no authority to take any disciplinary action against the petitioner and as such the orders of suspension and initiation of disciplinary proceeding at the instance of the ex Managing Committee was not legal and therefore, not sustainable in the eye of law.

(3.) IN O.J.C. No. 17277 of 1997 a similar counter has also been filed by the Headmaster of the institution. A counter has been filed on behalf of the State through the Inspector of Schools opposite party No. 3. In the said counter it is submitted that as per rule 28 of the 1991 Rules after the school became an aided one, the Managing Committee is required to be reconstituted. Accordingly the Headmaster incharge was intimated to submit the proposal for reconstitution of the Managing Committee as per rule 28 of the amended Rules of 1994 on 13 11 1995. The senior most teacher in charge of the Headmaster submitted a proposal on 16 2 1996 which was received in the office and after examination oi the same by letter dated 24 10 1996 the Headmaster in charge was directed to apprise the Sub Collector, Kamakhyanagar requesting him to nominate another person to act as the President of the Managing Committee. The order of suspension issued by the ex Managing Committee was sent to the State Government for approval. But the same has been turned down by opposite party No. 3 because prior permission was not taken by the Secretary of the Managing Committee before placing the petitioner under suspension and the Managing Committee of the institution had not been reconstituted and approved and the ex Managing Committee was not competent to pass such orders.