BRAJABANDHU NAYAK Vs. STATE OF ORISSA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) All the three writ applications arise out of the judgment and order dated 18.11.2009 passed by the Orissa Administrative Tribunal, Bhubaneswar Bench, Bhubaneswar in O.A.No.624 of 2003. The petitioners in W.P.(C) No.1759 of 2010 were respondents 4, 5, 6, 8, 13, 15, 18, 20, 21, 22 and 25 before the Tribunal and the petitioners in W.P.(C) No.1732 of 2010 were respondents 7, 9, 23 and 37 before the Tribunal. The Original Application had been filed before the Tribunal by the private opposite parties 4 to 30 in W.P.(C) No.1759 of 2010.

(2.) The facts leading to the present litigation are as follows:- The National Policy on Education 1986 led emphasis on teacher education programme including pre-service and in-service training of teachers of both the formal and non-formal streams. In the context of Universalization of Elementary Education, the N.P.E. envisaged revitalising elementary teacher education programme and, accordingly, the Government of India issued guidelines for upgrading some of the existing Secondary Training Schools as District Institutes of Education and Training (D.I.E.T.) to be opened one in each district to cater the needs of training of teachers working at the elementary level of both streams. In pursuance thereof, during 1987-88 five D.I.E.Ts for the districts of Koraput, Sundargarh, Mayurbhanj, Kalahandi and Dhenkanal and during 1988-89, six more D.I.E.Ts for the districts of Puri, Cuttack, Phulbani, Sambalpur, Bolangir and Keonjhar were sanctioned. According to the funding pattern, the State Government was to meet the existing level of expenditure in respect of each of the institutions as at the time of their upgradation and the balance of the requirement was to be funded by the Government of India. As per the guidelines, the teaching staffs required for each D.I.E.Ts have to be of the following categories, such as, Teacher Educators, Senior Teacher Educators/Vice-Principal and Principal. The guidelines also prescribed the mode of recruitment and the present case relates to Teacher Educators.

(3.) There was delay in recruitment of Teacher Educators as per the above Personnel Policy. The Government of India also intimated that the teachers will reimburse the pay and allowances of the staff of D.I.E.Ts up to 31.3.1991 to the extent of actual requirement. So long as the vacancies were not filled up, State could not have claimed reimbursement. Accordingly, by Resolution dated 28.1.1991 a decision was taken to make ad hoc appointment against the said post of Teacher Educators pending regular recruitment through State Selection Board. At this juncture, it was found that 17 private B. Ed. Colleges were functioning in the State till 14.8.1989 i.e. till coming into the force the Orissa Education (Amendment) Act, 1989. The said Amendment Act prohibited establishment, continuance and recognition of private B.Ed Colleges. These 17 private B.Ed Colleges, which were functioning till 14.8.1989, had both the teaching and non teaching staff and after closure of the said Colleges, they were unemployed. Those teaching and non-teaching staffs were agitating from time to time for their absorption in suitable vacancies under the Government. Therefore, having decided to fill up the post of Teacher Educators on ad hoc basis, a decision was also taken to absorb some of the teaching staff of the erstwhile B.Ed. Colleges in D.I.E.Ts as the Teacher Educators. After obtaining the list of said teachers, it was found that some of them did not have the required qualification and experience for appointment as Teacher Educators and some of them had also crossed the age limit prescribed for entry in to the Government Service. In order to make them eligible for appointment, it was felt necessary to relax the age, qualification and experience in suitable cases. Schedule-II to the aforesaid Resolution dated 28.1.1991 prescribed the mode of selection and it was further provided therein that in respect of appointment made for the purpose of rehabilitation of the teaching members of the defunct private B.Ed. Colleges, the procedure of conducting interview, written test etc. should be dispensed with and the Director, T.E. and S.C.E.R.T. should make appointment to such teaching members as Teacher Educators on ad hoc basis, if such persons possess the required qualification and experience and are within the age limit prescribed. Relaxation of age, experience and qualification in suitable cases should also be made by the Director, S.C.E.R.T. In terms of the above decision, the private opposite parties, who were applicants before the Tribunal in the Original Application, were appointed. The petitioners in both the writ applications, who were some of the respondents before the Tribunal, were in-service teachers from the school wings having requisite qualification and experience. In pursuance of an advertisement issued by the State Selection Board on 1.12.1991, they had applied for the post of Teacher Educators. Their C.C.Rs and Service Books were forwarded from the competent authority to the State Selection Board along with the application and through a selection process as prescribed in the guideline, they were selected and appointed as Teacher Educators. According to the petitioners, they were appointed as Teacher Educators on 17.9.1992 when the private opposite parties were continuing on ad hoc basis having been appointed as such on 20 th February 1991 and regularization of their services was subject to acceptance of their candidature by the State Selection Board. Though the private opposite parties were given ad hoc appointment for a period of one year, it was extended for another six months and again it was extended for another six months. Again on 6.5.1993 the ad hoc appointment of the private opposite parties was extended for a period of six months and further extension was granted for a period of six months from 14.1.1994. While they were continuing on ad hoc basis, their services being extended from time to time, the Government of Orissa issued a Resolution on 2.6.1994 wherein it was decided to regularize the services of the said ad hoc appointees with effect from the date of their joining as Teacher Educators in the D.I.E.Ts on ad hoc basis without prejudice to the claims of others. In terms of the above decision, 45 ad hoc employees were regularised without mentioning anything about the condonation of break-in-service in between different phases of ad hoc appointments.