PRAHALLAD BEHERA Vs. STATE OF ODISHA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioners have filed this writ application with the following prayer:

(2.) The petitioners, being Diploma Holders in various engineering disciplines, were selected by a Selection Committee in the year 1991 and joined as Teaching Assistants in various departments of Indira Gandhi Institute of Technology, Sarang (IGIT). Said institute is an autonomous institute being registered under the Societies Registration Act, 1860 and managed by a Board of Governors. The only avenue of promotion for the Teaching Assistants is the post of Senior Teaching Assistant, but in view of limited posts in the promotional cadre, likelihood of their promotion was bleak and amounted to stagnation in service. While working as such, the petitioners came to know that in a similar autonomous degree engineering college, run and managed by the State, namely, University College of Engineering (UCE), Burla, persons with qualification in diploma in engineering were appointed as Junior Instructors and were performing duties identical to that of the petitioners. Their next promotional avenue is Senior Instructor with higher scale of pay. Keeping in view the limited possibility of promotion of said Junior Instructors of UCE, the Government in Industries Department, as per memo dtd. 11/9/1981, decided that the Junior Instructors will be taken over to the scale of Senior Instructor as and when they acquired the minimum qualification prescribed for Senior Instructor, i.e. completion of five years of service in case of diploma holders and 10 years of service in case of ITI certificate holders. Accordingly, appropriate benefits were granted to the Junior Instructors of UCE . The petitioners, claiming to be similarly placed as their counter-parts in UCE, approached the authorities of IGIT by submitting representation on 19/2/1996 for grant of similar benefits. The grievance of the petitioner was considered by the Board of Governors in its 28th meeting held on 4/7/1996 and it was decided to refer the case to the Government for final decision. An Anomaly Committee constituted by the Government in the Department of Industries, under the Chairmanship of Additional Secretary, considered the issue in its meeting, held on 5/5/1998, and decided that same benefits should be extended to the similar category of employees. The Government thereafter sought for several clarifications from IGIT which were complied with from time to time. The Vice-Chancellor of Biju Pattnaik University of Technology was requested by the Government to furnish his views as to whether the entry qualification/job responsibility of Teaching Assistant/TDA/Junior Engineer of IGIT, Sarang is exactly the same as that of Junior Instructor of UCE, Burla as also regarding the equality of job of Senior Instructor. In response, the views of the University were communicated to the Government vide letter dtd. 2/9/2005 answering both the aforementioned queries in the affirmative. Since no action was taken, the petitioners again submitted a representation addressed to the Principal of IGIT on 18/12/2008. Since no action was taken, the petitioners approached this Court in W.P.(C). No. 15856 of 2009. By order dtd. 10/11/2009, a Division Bench of this Court directed the Secretary, Department of Industries to look into the grievances raised by the petitioners, through their representations, with liberty to them to submit fresh representations. Accordingly, the petitioners submitted fresh representation enclosing all relevant documents on 20/11/2009, which was forwarded by the Principal IGIT, Sarang on the same day to the Secretary. Since the representation was not considered within the time stipulated, the petitioners approached this Court again in CONTC No. 682 of 2010, which was disposed of on 19/4/2010 by this Court with direction to comply with the order dtd. 10/11/2009 withing three months. In view of such order, the Secretary, Department of Industries (Opposite Party No.1) considered and rejected the grievance of the petitioner by order dtd. 18/6/2010, copy of which is enclosed as Annexure-4, and impugned in the writ application.

(3.) The case of the State (Opposite Party No.1) is that the grant of promotional scale of pay of Senior Instructor to the Junior Instructors of UCE, Burla after completion of five years of service, irrespective of any sanctioned posts in the higher grade as per Government order dtd. 11/9/1981, was only to merge the scale of pay of Junior Instructor with that of Senior Instructor for the existing Junior Instructors for limited period to reduce number of scales. It was a one-time settlement for providing promotional scale to the then Junior Instructors of UCE, Burla. Further continuance of such principle is an outcome of misinterpretation of the instructions issued on 11/9/1981. It is the further case of Opposite Party No.1 that, in the meantime, petitioner No.1 and 4 have been promoted to the post of Senior Technical Assistant during the year 2021 and have also availed the benefits of MACP. In so far as promotion of Petitioner No.2 is concerned, there is no vacancy in the senior post. The petitioner No.3, in the meantime, has been transferred to another department as Junior Maintenance Engineer which is a separate cadre and job assignment for the post is totally different. Government has sanctioned Time Bound Advancement Scale (TBA), Assured Carrier Progression (ACP) scale of pay allowing financial upgradation. The petitioners have availed the benefits like regular progression upon completion of 10, 20 and 30 years of service.