BIJAYALAXMI NAIK Vs. STATE OF ORISSA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) In the accompanied writ application, the petitioner has inter alia prayed for quashing of the order dated 11.10.2012 passed by the Collector, Jagatsinghpur communicated vide letter dated 21.12.2012 by the D.P.C., SSA, Jagatsinghpur under Annexure-9 and further prayer is to direct opposite party nos.3 and 4 to engage the petitioner as Gana Sikshyak in Jagatsinghpur District in pursuance of Government Resolution dated 16.02.2008.

(2.) The factual matrix as borne out from the record in a nutshell is that the petitioner was initially appointed as a Non-Formal Facilitator in Arana Non-Formal Education Center on 31.01.1991 by the order of the D.I. of the School, Jagatsinghpur-II, Tirtol and she continued for one decade till closer of the scheme. After abolition of the Non Formal Educator Scheme, new scheme, namely, Educational Guarantee Scheme (EGS) was brought in place and as per the said scheme, the retrenched Non Formal facilitators were to be considered for Education Volunteer (EV) under EGS Scheme. The petitioner was selected and recommended for appointment as Education Volunteer of Arana EGS Centre by the District Project Coordinator (DPC) in letter dated 06.10.2004, which was forwarded to village education committee for issuance of appointment order. Accordingly, the President of the VEC issued the formal appointment/engagement order in favour of the petitioner, who resumed her duty on the very same day, i.e., 08.10.2004, as revealed from Annexure-5, while the petitioner was continuing as such, the Education Volunteer (EV), the State Government closed down the EGS scheme with effect from 31.03.2008. But the policy decision was taken by the State Government to rehabilitate the retrenched EVs of the erstwhile EGS centers as Gana Sikshyak as per the Resolution dated 16.02.2008. Since the case of the petitioner was not considered for engagement as Gana Sikshyaka despite representation made to the Collector, Jagatsinghpur, the petitioner was compelled to approach this Court in W.P.(C) No.9507 of 2012, which was disposed of on 18.07.2012 with a direction to the Collector, Jagatsinghpur to dispose of the representation of the petitioner within a period of 8 weeks from the date of filing of the representation by the petitioner. In deference to the direction of this Court, the petitioner submitted representation along with all the supporting documents, but the Collector rejected the claim of the petitioner for engagement as Gana Sikshayaka by the impugned order vide Annexure-9. Being aggrieved and dissatisfied with the impugned order, the petitioner has invoked the extra ordinary jurisdiction of this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for redressal of her grievances.

(3.) Controverting the averments made in the writ petition a counter affidavit has been filed by opposite party no.4. In the counter affidavit, it has been submitted that there was no proof with regard to the petitioner's continuance as E.V. in Arana E.G.S. Center, after being engaged by the VEC, there was neither any acquaintance regarding payment of remuneration nor VEC Bank account was available to justify the continuance of the petitioner. Therefore, as per the Government Resolution dated 16.02.2008, which inter alia states that the Government, after careful consideration of the problems of the E.Vs. under E.G.S. Scheme decided to rehabilitate E.Vs. in the EGS Centre, who have been disengaged or faced disengagement under the Education Guarantee Scheme as Gana Sikshayaka under the Sarva Sikshya Abhiyan. Since the petitioner never faced any disengagement on 31.03.2008, as she was not working as E.V. as per the enquiry report and official records. The Collector, Jagatsinghpur has rightly passed the order dated 11.10.2012 rejecting the claim of the petitioner as Gana Sikshayak, after due enquiry and observing the guidelines stipulated in the Government Resolution dated 16.02.2008. Hence, the petitioner is not entitled to be engaged as Gana Sikshyaka.