MAHESH CHANDRA MOHANTY Vs. STATE OF ODISHA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The Petitioner in the present Writ Petition seeks the following relief;

(2.) The Petitioner's case is that his father Jadunath Mohanty, while working as Daftary in A.B. College, Basudevpur died on 15/4/1988. He being a graduate at that time applied to the Governing Body of the College for appointment under the Rehabilitation Assistance Scheme, which was forwarded by the Principal to the Director, Higher Education, Orissa for consideration. By letter dtd. 6/7/1988, the Deputy Director returned the application to the Principal with direction to place the matter before the Governing Body for its consideration. The Governing Body in its resolution dtd. 2/1/1989 appointed the Petitioner in the post of Store-keeper in the Department of Zoology and such fact was communicated to the Director, Higher Education vide letter dtd. 6/6/1992. Pursuant to the order of appointment, the Petitioner joined as Store-keeper on 12/6/1992. Since then he has been working as such. By letter dtd. 10/9/1992 the Principal submitted proposal to the Director for approval of the appointment of the Petitioner and to include him under direct payment scheme. Reminders were submitted on 16/1/1993 and 15/9/1994. The Deputy Director requested the Principal to submit certain documents for consideration pursuant to which, the Principal submitted the required documents vide letter dtd.31/3/1995. The matter was kept pending for a long time thereafter. The Petitioner therefore, approached this Court in OJC No.1996/1997. By order dtd. 15/2/2011, this Court disposed of the Writ Petition directing the Director to consider the proposal submitted by the Principal way back in the year 1993 as expeditiously as possible preferably, within a period of two months from the date of communication of the order. Since the order was not complied with, the Petitioner filed a Contempt Petition bearing CONTC No.1073/2011. In the mean time, the Secretary to Government in Higher Education Department vide letter dtd. 27/12/2012, informed the Director that the State Government has approved six candidates for appointment under Rehabilitation Assistance Scheme including the Petitioner in different non-Government Aided Colleges. Pursuant to such letter the Director asked the Principal vide letter dtd. 14/1/2013 to appoint the Petitioner as a Junior Clerk after observing the required formalities. Accordingly, the Governing Body passed resolution on 16/1/2013 to appoint the Petitioner as Junior Clerk and he was appointed as such on the same date. But by letter dtd. 14/2/2013, the Principal assigned the job of Store-Keeper of the Department of Physics, Chemistry, Botany and Zoology to the Petitioner. It is stated that the Petitioner was appointed against a sanctioned post and the proposal for approval of his appointment was kept pending with the Director for years together. It is further stated that giving fresh appointment to the Petitioner, 21 years after he was appointed on Rehabilitation Assistance Scheme is entirely unjustified. Hence, the Writ Petition.

(3.) The case of the State (Opposite Party Nos.1 and 2) is that the appointment of the Petitioner on 12/6/1992 by the Governing Body was in violation of the Rules and moreover it was not competent to appoint any one without prior approval of the Government. It is further stated that appointment under the Rehabilitation Scheme is not a matter of right and in any case the benefit of such Scheme was extended to the families of teaching and non-teaching staff of the Non-Government Aided Colleges of the State by the Government in Higher Education Department Office Memorandum dtd. 10/8/2011. The Petitioner's claim was therefore, considered under such Office Memorandum and he was appointed being sponsored by the Director in his letter dtd. 14/1/2013. The petitioner cannot claim any benefit under the Rehabilitation Assistance Scheme long after the death of his father.