LAWS(ORI)-2022-7-169

RAJAKISHOR PRADHAN Vs. STATE OF ORISSA

Decided On July 05, 2022
Rajakishor Pradhan Appellant
V/S
STATE OF ORISSA Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The facts involved in both these applications are similar and involve a common question of law. As such, both the applications were heard together and are being disposed of by this common judgment. WPC (TAC) No. 35 of 2014

(2.) Mukundadaspur High School in the district of Khurda was an aided educational institution within the meaning of Sec. 3(b) of the Orissa Education Act, 1969. Its roll strength having increased beyond 100 from the year 1990-1991 onwards, the petitioner was appointed as Night-watcher -cum-Sweeper as per appointment letter issued on 20/12/1991. Such appointment is said to have been made against the 4th Peon as per the yardstick prescribed by the Government dtd. 8/7/1981. The petitioner's case was recommended by the Managing Committee to the Inspector of Schools for approval of his appointment but as no action was taken the petitioner approached this Court in OJC No. 13738 of 1997. This Court disposed of the aforesaid case by order dtd. 29/9/1997 directing the Inspector of Schools, Khurda Circle to take a decision within four months. Pursuant to such order passed by this Court, the Inspector of Schools vide order dtd. 16/9/1998 rejected the case of the petitioner regarding approval of his appointment on the ground that the post of 4th Peon is not admissible as per yardstick dtd. 8/7/1981 and the post of Daftary being a promotional post, the same can only be filled up by way of promotion from amongst the Class-IV employees of the School in order of seniority as per Government order dtd. 21/3/1996.

(3.) The opposite parties have filed a counter affidavit in WPC(TAC) No. 35 of 2014 justifying the rejection of the proposal for approval of appointment of the petitioner on the ground that the cases of all Class-IV employees of the School have been approved and since three posts of Class-IV employees of the School have been created by the Government, the question of approval of appointment of the petitioner as 4th Peon (Daftary) has been rightly rejected, as such post has not been created.