MANJUSHREE PATNAIK Vs. STATE OF ORISSA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner, who is an approved Lecturer in an aided college, has filed this writ petition, inter alia, with the following prayer: Issue rule Nisi upon the opposite parties to show cause as to why Annexure -10 shall not be quashed and as to why a writ of mandamus should not be issued to the opposite parties directing them to pay U.G.C. scale of pay to the petitioner along with arrear differential salary from the date she is entitled thereto and upon their showing no cause or showing insufficient cause to make the said rule Nisi as absolute. Annexure -10 is the order dated 23.6.2005 passed by the Commissioner -cum -Secretary to Government in Higher Education Department, O.P.1., rejecting the claim of the petitioner for grant of University Grants Commission Scale of Pay (in short, U.G.C.) which is sought to be quashed in this writ petition.

(2.) THE facts as delineated in the writ petition tend to reveal that by order dated 8.9.1980, Annexure -1, the petitioner was appointed as a Lecturer in English against the first post in Cuttack City College, which was later on renamed as Netaji Subhas Memorial College, at Raja Bagicha, Cuttack, where she joined on 15.9.1980. By notification dated 25.9.1997, Annexure -3, the services of the petitioner were confirmed by the Governing Body of the College with effect from 15.9.1983. Since the petitioner had secured 52.5% marks in M.A. examination, the Governing Body of the College moved the Utkal University for condonation of her deficiency in qualification. The Syndicate of the Utkal University held on 19th July, 1986 and 9th July, 1987 considering the resolution passed by the Senate held on 8th July, 1986 condoned the deficiency in the qualification of the petitioner, as per the communication of the Registrar, Utkal University dated 13.2,1989, Annexure -4. Thereafter, the Governing Body submitted a proposal for approval of the appointment of the petitioner as well as some non -teaching staff for the purpose of release of grant in -aid under the Direct Payment Scheme, which was approved by the State Government from the date of her initial appointment, i.e., 15.9.1980, and the Government further released 1/3rd of the salary under the Direct Payment Scheme with effect from 1.6.1988, 2/3rd with effect from 1.6.1990 and full salary cost with effect from 1.6.1992, vide Annexure -5. In the meantime, the petitioner acquired M. Phil qualification. The U.G.C. appointed a Committee to examine the structure of emoluments and conditions of service of University and College Teachers and considering the recommendations of the Committee, the U.G.C. submitted its recommendations to the Government of India. The Government of India after examining the various recommendations contained in the report and the observations of the U.G.C. communicated its decision to the State Government and requested the State Government to implement the Scheme after taking local conditions into consideration. Considering the aforesaid recommendations of Govt. of India, the State Govt. by the Resolution dated 6.10.1989, Annexure -8, decided to implement the scheme of Revision of Pay Scales for College Teachers on the terms and conditions mentioned therein. Clause -3.1 of the Resolution provided that the revised scales shall be applicable to all categories of full time teachers working in all affiliated Government Colleges and aided non -Government Colleges either covered or eligible to be covered under the Director Payment Scheme till 1.4.1989. Clause -3.2 of the Resolution stipulated that the revised scales of pay shall take effect from 1.1.1986. Subsequently, the State Government by another Resolution dated 6.11.1990 (Annexure -9) decided to implement the Scheme of Revision of Scales of Pay for college teachers with the terms and conditions prescribed by the Government of Orissa in its Resolution dated 6.10.1989. According to the petitioner, she being a full time teacher working in an aided non -Govt. college is covered by the Direct Payment Scheme prior to 1.4.1989 and, therefore, she has satisfied the norms prescribed in Resolution dated 6.10.1989 (Annexure -8) and is entitled to the U.G.C. scale of pay. Petitioner alleges that though she had made several representations to the opposite parties to allow her the U.G.C. scale of pay since she had satisfied all the requirements indicated in the Resolution dated 6,10.1989, no action was taken by the State Government and the Director of Higher Education in this regard, for which she preferred a Writ Petition being O.J.C. No. 5103/2002 praying for a direction in the nature of Writ of Mandamus to the opposite parties to release revised U.G.C. scale of pay in her favour along with arrear differential salary as well as current salary within a reasonable time. The said Writ Petition was disposed of by this Court on 31.3.2003 with a direction to the opposite parties to consider the case of the petitioner in the light of the judgment dated 24.7.1996 rendered by this Court in O.J.C. No. 6101 of 1995 Bharat Chandra Behera and Anr. v. State of Orissa and Ors. within a period of six weeks and to grant U.G.C. scale of pay to the petitioner if she satisfied the norms of the Resolution dated 6.10.1989. Consequent upon the aforesaid direction, the Commissioner -cum -Secretary to Government, O.P.1, considered the case of the petitioner and rejected the claim of the petitioner by order dated 23.6.2005, vide Annexure -10, Which is impugned in the present writ petition.

(3.) THE grounds for rejecting the claim of the petitioner as stated in the impugned order, Annexure -10, are that the petitioner's college was not a college within the meaning of Note (1) to Para -2 of the Resolution dated 6.11.1990 and that the petitioner was under - qualified till 1.4.1989 (cut off date). In the counter affidavit filed by the State in support of issuance of Annexure -10, similar stand has been taken.