BILKESH PARVEEN Vs. STATE OF ORISSA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) IN this writ petition under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India the petitioner challenges the Government order under Annexure -16 disallowing approval of her appointment and payment of Grant -in -aid from the date of her appointment to the post of lecturer in English in Tangi Mahavidyalaya, Kotsahi, in the district of Cuttack and has prayed for quashment of the said annexure and for issue of a direction mandating the opposite parties to approve her appointment and to pay her Grant -in -aid from the date of her appointment, i.e., from 1.11.1991.

(2.) THE case of the petitioner as averred in the writ petition is that she is a lecturer in English of Tangi Mahavidyalaya, Kotsahi which was affiliated to the Utkal University vide Annexure -1 in Intermediate Arts with 65 seats in English and other subjects. On the formation of the Council of Higher Secondary Education, Orissa, the Council under Annexure -2 dated 31.3.1984 extended its affiliation for Higher Secondary Course in Arts stream from the academic session 1983 -84 with 96 seats. The said college got concurrence for having three year Degree Course in Arts under Annexure -3 from the academic session 1990 -91 and 1991 -92 by the State Government with 128 seats in English and M.I.L. (Oriya) as compulsory subjects besides other optional subjects. The Utkal University granted affiliation at +3 Degree Arts stream of Tangi Mahavidyalaya from the academic session 1990 -91 with 128 seats. The petitioner relying on the aforementioned documents has stated that Tangi Mahavidyalaya is a college having both +2 and +3 wings. The petitioner admittedly was appointed by the resolution of the Governing Body of the college dated 7.9.1991 as a lecturer in English by the management of the Tangi Mahavidyalaya under Annexure -5 and she joined on 1.11.1991 against the post of lecturer in English vide Annexure -6. It is not disputed that Tangi Mahavidyalaya was put into Grant -in -aid fold as per the communication made by the Director of Higher Education, Orissa (O.P. No. 2) under letter No. 11557 dated 22.2.1990 with effect from 1.6.1988. It is stated that, therefore, when the petitioner was appointed by the Governing Body, Tangi Mahavidyalaya was an Aided Educational Institution within the meaning of Section 3(b) of Orissa Education Act, 1969 as amended from time to time. It is stated that while the institution was so continuing and some of the employees of the institution were receiving the salary component in accordance with Rule 9 of the Orissa Education (Recruitment and Conditions of Service of Teachers and Members of the Staff of Aided Educational Institutions) Rules, 1974, The Orissa (Non -Government Colleges, Junior Colleges and Higher Secondary Schools) Grant -in -Aid Order, 1994 (for short the 'Grant -in -Aid Order, 1994) came into force providing the modality as well as the procedures for releasing the Grant -in -aid in favour of the employees of the Aided Educational Institutions. Thereafter, the Orissa Aided Educational Institutions (Appointment of Lecturers Validation) Act, 1998 (for short the 'Validation Act, 1998) was enacted by the Legislature so as to validate the regular appointments made by the Governing Body during the period 1.1.1985 to 31.12.1992. In view of the above admitted position of law, the petitioner has sought for relief in the present writ petition for her approval to the 2nd post of Lecturer in English in accordance with the provisions of Validation Act, 1998 and, therefore, she has claimed the salary component on completion of five years of service at the rate 1/3rd of salary component, 2/3rd after seven years and full salary cost after nine years of appointment in accordance with the Grant -in -aid principle in consonance with the provisions of Grant -in -Aid Order, 1994. 2. Rule being issued the opposite parties entered appearance and O.P. No. 2 filed counter affidavit and in the said counter affidavit O.P. No. 2 has taken a stand that since the petitioner was appointed at a point of time when the college was an aided one, her appointment is irregular. It is stated in the counter that the +3 Degree Course having opened in the institution from the academic session 1991 being not an aided one, the workload of the college for approval of any post is to be adjudged taking into account the +3 wing workload only. It is stated further that the Validation Act, 1998 would have no application since the appointment of the petitioner was made against a non -admissible post. The +3 wing of the college having been declared and aided institution by the Government, on 1.1.2004, therefore, the order passed by the State Government under Annexure -16 is just and legal, it is asserted.

(3.) THE O.P. No. 2 by way of reply to the rejoinder filed by the petitioner has submitted an affidavit indicating the workload of the +2 stream so as to justify that the 2nd post was not at all warranted to the college when the petitioner was appointed.