PARTHA SARATHI DASH Vs. STATE OF ODISHA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The Petitioner, in the present Writ Petition is aggrieved by non-payment of his salary for the period from 27/10/2010 to 31/10/2015.

(2.) Bereft of unnecessary details, the facts of the case are that the Petitioner was appointed as an Asst. Teacher on 31/7/1984 in Labanya Devi Ucha Vidyapitha, Santara in the district of Jajpur. At that time he was untrained, but he acquired B.Ed. qualification on 28/5/1990. As per the prevalent yardstick, four trained graduate teachers were required to impart education out of whom, two were to be Arts graduates and two, Science graduates. The Petitioner being a trained Arts graduate was appointed in trained graduate post by the Managing Committee. The School became eligible to receive grant-in-aid w.e.f. 1/6/1994. Because of termination of the service of a co-employee namely, Prafulla Kumar Nayak w.e.f. 3/11/1992, the post held by him was held to be not eligible to receive grant-in-aid. Though the said Prafulla Kumar Nayak challenged his order of termination before this Court (O.J.C. No.8262/1996), such order was held to be valid. There being no further challenge, the same attained finality. Inspite of the same, the Petitioner's claim for sanction of grant-in-aid in his favour was not considered on the ground that the same is relatable to the case of Prafulla Kumar Nayak. Since the case of Prafulla Kumar Nayak ultimately attained finality, but the case of the Petitioner was not considered for sanction of grant-in- aid he approached this Court in OJC No.99/1999, which was disposed of on 24/1/1997 by the following order;

(3.) However, no action was taken in the matter for which the Petitioner filed W.P.(c) No.13458/2009 which was disposed of on 10/11/2009 by directing the authorities to dispose of the Petitioner's representation within three weeks. Since, nothing was done, he filed CONTC Nos.657/2010 and 996/2010. During pendency of the CONTC No.996/2010, the Opposite Party No.1 by order dtd. 24/9/2010 (Annexure-2), held that the appointment of the Petitioner was against a non-sanctioned post beyond the yardstick during 1994 without following rules and in the mean time the post of TGT Arts had been abolished. The Petitioner therefore, approached this Court yet again in W.P.(c) No.19323/2010. By a detailed judgment passed on 11/4/2014, this Court, inter alia, held as follows;