Orissa High Court
WP(C)/851/2021 on 1 February, 2021
W.P.(C) No. 851 of 2021
of 2020
02. 01.02.2021 The matter is taken up through video conferencing.
Heard Mr. Ranjit Samal, learned counsel for the petitioner and
Mr. B. Mohanty, learned Standing Counsel for School & Mass Education
Department.
The petitioner has filed this application seeking direction to the
opposite parties to treat the petitioner at par with the employees of other
aided educational institutions, who have been extended with grant-in-aid
in accordance with Grant-in-Aid Order, 1994, and accordingly extend all
benefits as applicable to the aided educational institutions within the
meaning of Section 3(b) of the Orissa Education Act, such as earned
leaves as prescribed under Rule 9 of 1977 Rules, extra ordinary leaves as
prescribed under Rule 12 of 1977 Rules, as well as study leaves as
prescribed under Rule 13 of 1977 Rules and other benefits as provided
under 1977 Rules, Pension Rules, GPF Rules, though the same facilities
and benefits were given to the employees of other institutions, which
were notified under Section 3(b) of the Orissa Education Act, 1969
pursuant to Grant-in-Aid Order, 1994.
Mr. Ranjit Samal, learned counsel for the petitioner has
contended that since the petitioner is working in an educational
institution receiving block grant, in view of the judgment passed in
Ritanjali Giri @ Paul v. State of Odisha (School & M.E. Deptt.) &
others, 2016 (I) ILR-1162 wherein this Court has already held that the
legal heirs of deceased employees of educational institutions receiving
block grant are entitled to get compassionate appointment, pursuant to
which the Government of Odisha in the Department of School & Mass
Education has issued a circular on 01.08.2019 granting benefit of
compassionate appointment to the legal heirs of the deceased employees
working in fully aided educational institutions and educational
institutions receiving grant-in-aid (New)/block grant, therefore, other
benefits as claimed in the writ application should be extended to the
petitioner.
Mr. B. Mohanty, learned Standing Counsel for School & Mass
Education Department contended that in view of law laid down in
2
Ritanjali Giri @ Paul (supra) although benefit of compassionate
appointment to the legal heirs of the deceased employees of educational
institutions receiving block grant has already been extended by the State
Government, pursuant to letter dated 01.08.2019, but so far as other
claims as made in this writ application, the petitioner is not entitled to
get the same, as because the benefit of Grant-in-Aid Order, 1994 was
denied by this Court in State of Odisha v. Sri Lokanath Behera, 2018
(II) OLR 932, which has been confirmed by the apex Court in Civil Appeal
No. 7295 of 2019 arising out of SLP(C) No. 8343 of 2019 disposed of on
16.09.2019.
Considering the contentions raised by learned counsel for the
parties and after going through the records, this Court is of the
considered view that since the benefit of compassionate appointment to
the legal heirs of deceased employees of educational institutions
receiving block grant has already been extended by the authority, vide
circular dated 01.08.2019, therefore, without expressing any opinion on
the merits of the case, the matter is remitted back to the authority
concerned for consideration with regard to extension of other benefits as
claimed in the writ application taking into account the ratio decided in
Ritanjali Giri @ Paul (supra) within a period of four months from the
date of communication of this order. Needless to mention, if it is found
that the petitioner is entitled to get all the benefits, as claimed in the writ
application in consonance with the law laid down in Ritanjali Giri @
Paul (supra), the same shall be granted within the time stipulated.
The writ petition is thus disposed of.
..............................
GDS
Dr. B.R. Sarangi, J.
