SOUMYASHREE DAS Vs. GOVERNING BODY OF BIREN MITRA MEMORIAL WOMENS COLLEGE
HIGH COURT OF ORISSA
Governing Body Of Biren Mitra Memorial Womens College
Click here to view full judgement.
P.Patnaik, J. -
(1.) Assailing the action of the Principal-in-charge of the B.M.M. Women's College in issuing the order of disengagement of the petitioner, the petitioner has inter alia prayed for quashing of the order dated 4.05.2017 under Annexure-8 so far as it relates to her.
(2.) The facts as averred in the writ petition in a nutshell is that pursuant to a selection process, the petitioner was appointed as Lecturer in Home Science in Biren Mitra Memorial Women's College, which is an aided educational institution under Section 3(6) of the Odisha Education Act, 1969. Accordingly, the petitioner joined on 18.06.2012. While continuing as such, an advertisement was published in the daily newspaper 'The Samaj' on 24.08.2013 for regular appointment and the petitioner applied in pursuance of the said advertisement and the petitioner having undergone the process of selection was duly selected and was issued with appointment order as Lecturer on 24.12.2013 and she joined on 26.12.2013 as per Annexure-5 series. Due to non-payment of salary, the petitioner along with other lecturers submitted representation to the A.D.M. who was the President of the Governing Body and due to intervention of opposite party no.2, the salary was paid to the petitioner. It has been alleged in the writ petition that the action of the petitioner did not find favour with the Principal-in-charge and being vindictive passed an order of antedated disengagement with effect from 01.05.2017 vide order dated 04.05.2017 under Annexure8 and the reference of the letter of the Regional Director of Education dated 10.08.2015 and 19.09.2016 which have been referred to in the impugned order pertains to the decision of the Staff Selection meeting. Being aggrieved and dissatisfied by the impugned order dated 04.05.2017 under Annexure-8 the petitioner has been constrained to knock the doors of this Court for redressal of her grievances.
(3.) Mr.S.K.Das learned counsel for the petitioner has referred to Rule 8 of The Odisha Education (Recruitment and Conditions of Service of Teachers and Members of the Staff and Aided Educational Intuitional Rules, 1974, (herein after referred to as 1974 Rules) Further, the learned counsel has referred to the order dated 30.08.2017 of this Court wherein the learned counsel for opposite party no.1 was directed to obtain instruction with regard to Annexure-8 since the decision of the staff selection meeting is without jurisdiction. Moreover, the impugned order has been passed without prior approval of the Director under Section 10-A of the Odisha Education Act. The learned counsel has also referred to Clause-5 of the Yardstick for approval of Posts in Aided Educational institutions for the purposes of grant-in-aid Rule 21 of the 1974 Rules, Governing Body and Sec.10-A of the Odisha Education Act. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted by referring to Annexure-9 to the rejoinder which relates to staff council meeting dated 29.04.2017 is without jurisdiction as Staff Council meeting has no locus to disengage any staff from the college and the Resolution is completely illegal and fraught with mala fide. Further, in the rejoinder it has been mentioned that as per the policy decision of the State Government vide letter dated 26.04.2017 for separation of +2 and +3 wing which clearly mentioned that in case of State scale teachers, the separation will be made on the basis of seniority. The senior Lecturer will be placed in senior wing and the junior are placed in +2 wing. The learned counsel for the petitioner by referring to Government letter dated 26.04.2017 under Annexure-10 has submitted that the decision of the staff council meeting has violated the order of the Government under Annexure-10. Learned counsel has referred to the General Administration & Public Grievance Department order dated 19.07.2017 with regard to applicability of provision of Odisha Group-C and Group D Contractual Appointment Rule, 2013 and Group B contractual to the recruitment for which appointments were made prior to commencement of these Rules. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that by virtue of the said Gzettee Notification dated 22.07.2017 the petitioner is to be declared as regular employee and the order of disengagement dated 04.05.2017 under Annexure-8 is liable to be quashed.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner in order to buttress his submission has referred to the decision (Managing Committee, Majhipada M.E.School-vrs.-State of Orissa and others, 1992 1 OrissaLR 447);
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.