SUJIT NARAYAN PRASAD,J. - (1.) Mr. D.K. Mohapatra, learned counsel appearing for respondent no.1 (in both the appeals) has submitted that both the appeals may be taken up together. He has further insisted upon the Court that F.A.O. No.194 of 2016 may be heard first, since pleadings are complete. Mr. B. Senapati, learned Additional Government Advocate appearing for the State-appellants (in both the appeals) has fairly submitted that since the issues raised in both the appeals are similar, same may be heard together. In view of such submissions, this Court, after going across the judgments passed by the Tribunal and the grounds taken in both appeals, has found that the issues raised in both the appeals are similar and as such, heard both the appeals together and accordingly are being disposed of by this common judgment.
(2.) Both the appeals have been filed by the State of Odisha, represented through the Commissioner-cum-Secretary to Government, Department of Higher Education, Bhubaneswar under the provision of Section 24-C of the Orissa Education Act, 1969 assailing the judgments dated 11.01.2016 and 26.11.2016 passed by the Presiding Officer, State Education Tribunal, Odisha, Bhubaneswar in G.I.A. Case Nos.471 of 2012 and 469 of 2012 respectively whereby and whereunder the Tribunal, while allowing the applications filed by the respondent no.1 (in both the appeals), has extended the benefit of grant-in-aid by virtue of the Grant-in-Aid Order, 1994.
(3.) The grounds for assailing the aforesaid judgments as has been taken in the instant appeals are:- (i) That the G.I.A. applications preferred before the Tribunal is maintainable, since it is in violation of the provision of sub-section(3) of Section 24-B of the Orissa Education Act, 1969 which is a condition precedent for maintainability of grant-in-aid as before the Tribunal. (ii) That the post held by the respondent no.1 (in both the appeals) is admissible to the college i.e. Gop College, Gop, District-Puri from the academic session 1993-94, they have joined in the college on 01.08.1993 and 2.11.1993 respectively and as such, the post held by them has completed the qualifying period of 5 years as on the cut-off date i.e. 1.6.1994 as per Grant-in-Aid Order, 1994. (iii) That the Tribunal has taken into consideration the order passed by Hon'ble the Supreme Court in Civil Appeal No(s).796 of 2008 i.e. in the case of State of Orissa and Ors. v. Prabhawati Padhihari wherein it has been held that the said cut-off date of 1.6.1994 for the purpose of extension of grant-in-aid in respect of the post of Non-Aided Colleges as per the Grant-in-Aid Order, 1994. (iv) That the Tribunal has failed to appreciate the mandate of this Court that merely satisfying the eligibility by an institution, post cannot claim grant-in-aid until and unless an order is passed to that effect by the competent authority with respect to the particular post in a subject in an institution. (v) The ratio laid down by Full Bench of this Court in the case of Laxmidhar Pati and Ors. v. State of Orissa and Ors., reported in 1996 (I) OLR 152 has been taken into consideration.;