PRAVAT KUMAR PATTNAYAK; LAXMIDHAR MOHAPATRA; MAMATA M MANTRY; BAIJAYANTI SAHU; SADANANDA SAHOO; SUDHANGINI SAMANTRAY Vs. STATE OF ODISHA AND OTHERS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) In all these writ petitions common issue is involved and as such the matter has been directed to be heard together and accordingly it has been heard together and is being disposed of by this common judgment.

(2.) The orders dtd.14.01.2010 passed by the Additional Director (General of Orissa Primary Education Programme Authority are under challenge.

(3.) The facts of the cases of the petitioners in all these writ petitions are that all the petitioners being eligible as per the guideline for engagement in new E.G.S. Centre in different areas, made applications, got selected and the Village Education Committee of the said centre while appointing the petitioners as Education Volunteers for t he E.G.S. centres, recommended their appointment for approval but the petitioners have not been allowed to work on the plea that the centre will be upgraded to Primary School. The government of Odisha through Department of School and Mass Education has come out with decision as contained in resolution No.3358 dtd.16.2.2008 resolving therein to rehabilitate all the disengaged Education Volunteers who have faced disengagement due to upgradation of EGS to regular Primary School as Gana Sikshyak under Sarva Sikshya Aviyana, in pursuance to the said resolution steps for engagement of disengaged Education Volunteers had been taken by the competent authority and the cases of the petitioners have also been enquired into who gave favourable report in their favour but the petitioners have not been engaged as Gana Sikshyak till date, although all the petitioners fulfill the eligibility criteria as laid down in the policy decision of the Government, petitioners having no option had approached this court under its writ jurisdiction and while disposing of the writ petitions this court has directed the opposite parties to take decision with respect to the grievance of the petitioners within stipulated time and in terms of the order passed by this court the authorities have taken decision but rejected their claims vide impugned orders, hence this writ petition on the ground that the authorities have passed the order without application of mind and without considering the fact that they have been engaged with approval of the District E.G.S. Committee. A report to that effect has also been submitted showing the fact that the petitioners have been engaged by the Village Education Committee, hence the authority ought to have taken into consideration the case of the petitioners for their rehabilitation by engaging them as Gana Sikshyak.