GIRIJA PRASANNA PATTNAIK Vs. STATE OF ORISSA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal is directed against the judgment dated 8.5.2012 passed by learned Presiding Officer, State Education Tribunal, Orissa, Bhubaneswar in GIA Case No. 61 of 2011 (Annexure-19), dismissing the claim of the appellant for validation of his services under the Orissa Aided Educational Institutions (Appointment of Lecturers Validation) Act, 1998.

(2.) Mr.S.Patra, learned counsel for the appellant, strenuously urged that the appellant applied for appointment as Lecturer in Political Science pursuant to the advertisement (Annexure-6) dated 26.7.1992. By following due procedure of selection, he was appointed on 12.8.1992 vide Annexure-8 and 2 he joined the appointment on 13.8.1992 vide Annexure-9. While he was so continuing, the Orissa Aided Educational Institutions (Appointment of Lecturers Validation) Act, 1998, hereinafter referred to as "Validation Act, 1998" came into force on 17.10.1998 for validating the appointment of lecturers. As per the provisions contained in Section 3(1) of the Validation Act, 1998, the lecturers appointed against the approved or admissible posts between 1.1.1985 and 31.12.1992 and continuing in service having requisite qualification were to be deemed to have been validly appointed. As the appellant was appointed on 12.8.1992 before the cut-off date, as per the Validation Act, 1998 his service was to be validated. Consequently recommendation was made by the Director, Higher Education, Orissa to the State Government for validating the services of the appellant, but instead of validating the services of the appellant in accordance with the Validation Act, 1998, without proper application of mind, the State Govt. ordered for payment of salary to the appellant from Block Grant. The appellant therefore, approached the State Education Tribunal by invoking jurisdiction under Section 24-B of the Orissa Education Act claiming validation of his services under the Validation Act, 1998 and release of grantin-aid admissible to the post, which was dismissed by the Tribunal as per judgment dated 8.5.2012, Annexure-19. It is further submitted that the appellant having been appointed as Lecturer in Political Science against 4th post in a composite college, the benefits of the said post could not have been denied to him and the contention that the appellant was appointed as against the post of Lecturer in Political Science in +3 wing of the college was thoroughly misconceived. It is specifically urged that while dismissing the appellant?s Appeal, the learned Tribunal did not apply its mind to the provisions of law. The 3 appellant therefore seeks to quash the said judgment of the Tribunal and direct the State Govt. to validate the services of the petitioner under the Validation Act, 1988 and release his salary by way of grant-in-aid.

(3.) Mr.S.Das, learned Addl.Standing Counsel appearing for the State urged that the learned Tribunal has not committed any error, calling for interference by this Court and whatever entitlement is there by way of release of Block Grant has already been extended to the appellant. He further urged that the appellant having been appointed against the +3 Wing of the college, he is not entitled to the relief sought in the appeal. Therefore, there being no apparent error on the face of record, this Court may not exercise the appellate power to set aside the judgment impugned.