RADHARANI SAMAL Vs. STATE OF ORISSA AND OTHERS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Mr. Jyotirmay Gupta, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr.Ajit Kumar Mohanty/learned Standing Counsel for the School and Mass Education Department.

(2.) Challenge has been made to the inaction of the opposite parties in not disbursing the differential arrear salary as well as current salary to the petitioner in trained graduate scale of pay from the date of attaining the age of 48 years.

(3.) It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that by virtue of Annexure-7, the clarification dated 16.4.2010 issued by the Joint Secretary to Government/School and Mass Education Department, the untrained graduate teachers in Government/Non-Government M.E. and High School on attaining the age of 48 years/are eligible to get trained graduate scale of pay. He drew the attention of the Court to Annexure-B. the letter issued by the Deputy Director (NGS)/Orissa/Directorate of Secondary Education/Orissa to all the Inspectors of Schools to submit the proposal on the cases in which the Managing Committee of Block Grant High Schools have appointed persons against such posts to accord permission by the Government to approve such all such posts. He also further drew the attention of this Court to Annexure-9 where the Head Mistress of Banarnali Brahmachari Girls' High School has recommended the case of the petitioner. to the concerned Inspector of School to allow her to draw salary as trained teacher as the petitioner has attained the age of 48 years having requisites qualification in accordance with the circular as stated above. With reference to the rejoinder affidavit dated 3.9.2014 filed by the petitioner to the counter filed by opposite party no.3, he further submits that similarly situated persons have already been paid the necessary differential salary as well as current salary vide No. 632 dated 6.2.2014 issued by the DEO, Kalahandi and Office Order No.ll007 dated 3.9.2013 issued by the D.E.O., Cuttack. So, he submits that there should not be discrimination between the petitioner and her colleagues and accordingly, the petitioner should be paid the differential salary as well as current salary.