MOUSUMI MOHAPATRA Vs. STATE OF ODISHA AND OTHERS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Since common question is involved in both the appeals, they are being heard together and disposed of by this common judgment. The issue raised by the appellant, in both the appeals, is that the GIA Cases being Nos.78 of 2015 and 200 of 2016, which are now pending before the State Education Tribunal, Odisha, Bhubaneswar, are not maintainable but the Tribunal, without considering the grounds taken by the appellant regarding their non-maintainability, has come to the conclusion that both the aforesaid GIA cases are maintainable and accordingly, date has been fixed for its adjudication on merit.

(2.) The brief fact of the case is that the respondent no.6 who has been appointed as Lecturer in Education against the vacant post in the institution in question and as such, she has made an application to get the benefit of grant-in-aid under the provision of GIA Order, 2008 by filing GIA Case No.68 of 2010 before the State Education Tribunal, Odisha, Bhubaneswar for considering her name for approval of appointment as Lecturer in Education under GIA Order, 2008 instead of considering it in favour of the appellant, as she was continuing in the college from the date of her appointment.

(3.) While, on the other hand, learned counsel for the Staterespondents no.1 to 3 as also the learned counsel for the respondent no.6 have jointly submitted that the Tribunal has got the jurisdiction to entertain the appeal under Section-24-B of the Act, 1969 to come to a finding regarding eligibility or entitlement of getting benefit of grant-in-aid and to reach to this conclusion. The Tribunal is supposed to go into the legality and propriety of the order of resignation so that in order to reach to the conclusion as to whether the respondent no.6 was continuing with the post or not and can be arrived at further in the order passed by the Director, Higher Education, Odisha, Bhubaneswar on 16.12.2014, the same was under challenge in the GIA Case No.78 of 2015 wherein she has been held not continuing in the college since 2003 and is not a staff of the college since 2003 and as such, in order to reach to the conclusion as to whether the respondent no.6 was continuing since the year 2003 which has been negated by the Director, Higher Education, Odisha, Bhubaneswar which is under challenge in GIA Case No.78 of 2015. The Tribunal is to go with the root which lies in the issue of resignation of respondent no.6. Hence, the Tribunal has rightly entertained the application in order to reach the conclusion.