DIPAK KUMAR SAHOO Vs. STATE OF ORISSA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner in this writ petition assails the validity of the Order No. 5368 dated 22.4.1996 at Annexure -5 by which the Inspector of Schools, Bolangir Circle, Bolangir, has refused to approve his appointment as 4th Peon in the school.

(2.) THE case of the petitioner is that pursuant to the resolution of the Managing Committee dated 12.12.1991, he came to be appointed as 4th Peon in Chaitanya Panigrahi High School, Batharla. He joined the post on 18.12.1991 and has been discharging his duties as such from that day without any break. The said school was notified to be an aided educational institution by Government Order No. 12889 dated 2.5.1995. The Headmaster of the school accordingly forwarded the names of the members of staff to the Inspector of schools, Bolangir for approval of their appointment in letter dated 19.6.1995 at Annexure -3. On 31.10.1995, the Inspector of Schools made a visit to the school and verified the records and relevant attendance registers and forwarded a copy of his visit report to the Headmaster under Memo No. 823 dated 12.1.1996 at Annexure -4. In the said report, the petitioner's name finds place at SI. No. 1 3. Despite the aforesaid report as no action was taken by the Inspector, the petitioner filed writ petition bearing OJC No. 945 of 1996. A Bench of this Court by order dated 12.2.1996 disposed of the said writ petition by directing the Inspector of Schools to consider the proposal submitted by the Headmaster and dispose of the same within the period indicated in the order. In pursuance of the aforesaid direction, the Inspector of Schools has passed the impugned Office Order No. 5368 dated 22.4.1996 at Annexure -5.

(3.) SHRI Swain, learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that Rule 30 (k) of the Orissa Education (Establishment, Recognition and Management of Private Schools) Rules, 1991 (corresponding to Rule 9 (a) of the Orissa Education (Management of Private Schools) Rules, 1980, since repealed), provides that the Managing Committee shall make appointment of teaching and non -teaching staff in accordance with the provisions contained in the Education Act, Rules and Instructions of the Department. At the time of appointment of the petitioner in the school as 4th Peon, the yardstick prescribed by the Government in Education and Youth Service Department Letter No. 28465 EYS dated 8.7.1981 was in force which provided that if the roll strength of the school exceeded 100, one post of 4th Peon was admissible. As the Managing Committee was required to make appointment as per the aforesaid yardstick, the petitioner was appointed as 4th peon and the roll strength of the School justified such appointment. Learned Counsel appearing for the opp. parties, on the other hand, submitted that the Government Letter No. 28465 EYS dated 8.7.1981 provided for admissibility of a post of Daftary and the said post being a promotional post, the petitioner could not have been appointed straightaway as Daftary although he describes himself loosely as the 4th peon. In this connection, learned State Counsel has referred to order dated 8.4.1997 passed by a Bench of this Court in M.C. No. 10326 of 1996 (arising out of OJC No. 7723 of 1995 - Lokanath Ray v. Managing Committee of Samanta Singhar High School), Letter No. 20985 dated 10.6.1996 of the Director, Secondary Education, Orissa and the Letter No. 36118/ SME dated 13.11.1996 of the Government of Orissa in -the Department of School and Mass Education. Bhubaneswar.