TARULATA PARIDA Vs. STATE OF ORISSA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioner in this application under Article 226 of the Constitution of India has sought for a direction to the opposite parties to implement the orders as per Annexure 1 and 5 to the writ petition and to allow her to join her post in P.N. College and to pay her salary with effect from 11.7.2001 till the date of her joining.

(2.) IN this writ application as the facts narrated tend to reveal, the petitioner was appointed as Lecturer in Botany and on 12.5.1998 she joined as Lecturer in Botany against the first post in Nachuni Mahavidyalaya, Nachuni in Khurda district which came into the grant -in -aid fold in the year 1993. On 3.9.1999 the husband of the petitioner was transferred on promotion as Principal, Indira Gandhi Institute of Cooperative Management to Lucknow (U.P.) and since then the petitioner had been representing for her transfer to a college within the vicinity of Bhubaneswar.On 30.6.2001 vide the order Annexure -1, the petitioner was transferred from Nachuni College and posted at P.N. College, Khurda in place of Dr. S. K. Naik, opposite party No.4 and opposite party No.4 was asked to join in place of the petitioner at Nachuni College. The petitioner was relieved by the Principal, Nachuni College with effect from 10.7.2001 A.N. and when she submitted her joining report to the Principal, P.N. College, Khurda, i.e., opposite party No.3 on 11.7.2001, opposite party No.3 refused to accept the joining report and directed her to come on 12.7.2001. On 12.7.2001, opposite party No.3 made an endorsement on the joining report of the petitioner that as per the telephonic direction of the Director, Higher Education, the petitioner was to meet the Director regarding her joining. It is alleged that in order not to disturb opposite party No.4, opposite party No.3 is not implementing the order, Annexure -1, and as she has already been transferred and relieved from Nachuni College since 10.7.2001, it is submitted that it is expedient to direct the opposite parties to allow the petitioner to join at P.N. College and to release her salary with effect from 11.7.2001 treating the intervening period as duty period. It was further argued that Annexure B/2 dated 28.7.2001 purported to have been issued cancelling the transfer order of the petitioner to P.N. College, Khurda, is illegal and arbitrary and the said order has not yet been received by the writ petitioner. It appears that Annexure B/2 disclosing cancellation of the order of transfer of the petitioner was brought to the notice of this Court through the counter affidavit filed by the opposite party No.2 for which the writ application was duly amended challenging the said order, Annexure B/2.

(3.) IN this background the only question to be decided by this Court is whether the salary of the petitioner for the period from 10.7.2001 to 14.9.2001 was to be released by the opposite parties as she had not been informed about cancellation of her transfer, in which event she was to report to duty at Nachuni Mahavidyalaya, Nachuni. Ultimately, by the intervention of this Court the petitioner has been given posting at S.J. College of Education and Technology as per the order dated 29.6.2002 of opposite party No.2.