SACHIDANANDA DAS Vs. STATE OF ORISSA AND ORS.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD Mr. U.B. Mohapatra, Learned Counsel for the Petitioner, Mr. Tripathy. Learned Counsel for the State & Mr. B.B. Mohanty, Learned Counsel appearing for Opp. Party No. 6.

(2.) THE Petitioner in this Writ, Petition seeks to assail the order passerby the Director, Secondary Education, Bhubaneswar in Appeal Case No. 59 of 2000.

(3.) THE Director after hearing the parties & perusing the records, dismissed the appeal mainly on three grounds. It was held that though the termination order was passed on 10.7.1999 & the period for preferring an appeal is one month, the Petitioner filed the same on 6.6.2000 without any petition for condonation of delay. Thus, the same was grossly barred by limitation. It was further observed that following the principles of recruitment, Sri Bibekananda Swain, Opp. Party No. 6 who was a trained graduate was appointed in the post which fell vacant in view of termination of the Petitioner. But then, the said Bibekananda Swain was not impleaded as a party to the appeal. The Director, therefore, held that the appeal was liable to be dismissed for non -joinder of necessary parties. So far as merit of the case is concerned, the Director observed that the Petitioner was not a trained teacher. The school in question was brought within the grant -in -aid fold & in consonance with the notification issued on 18.1.1999 Ta recognized school is prohibited from engaging untrained teachers. The said order of the Government of Orissa, School & Mass Education Department further clearly stipulated that the provisions of the Rule's should be strictly adhered to & the Government should be ensured that untrained teachers are not appointed in High Schools while granting provisional recognition. Thus, the school had no other option but to terminate the services of the Petitioner, who did not possess the requisite qualification.