Orissa High Court
Bibhuti Prasad Panda vs State Of Odisha on 6 December, 2022
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK
WP(C) No.20579 of 2017
1. Bibhuti Prasad Panda
2. Bashistha Kumar
Pradhan
3. Miss Kabita Behera
4. Miss Debasmita Panda
5. P. Ramesh Rao
6. P. Murali Krishna
7. Miss Prafulli Chitiki .... Petitioners
Mr. B. Routray, Senior Advocate
Mr. S.D. Routray, Advocate
-versus-
1. State of Odisha
2. Orissa Model Tribal
Education Society
(OMTES)
3. Director, S.T. & S.C
Development Department
-cum- Member Secretary
4. Union of India
5. Government of Odisha
represented through the
Principal Secretary,
Finance Department .... Opp. Parties
Mr. R.N. Mishra
Addl. Government Advocate
Mr. Bigyan Kumar Sharma,
Advocate for opposite party
no.2
CORAM:
JUSTICE S.K. SAHOO
// 2 //
ORDER
Order No. 06.12.2022
I.A. No.14925 of 2022
04. This matter is taken up through Hybrid arrangement
(video conferencing/physical mode).
This is an application for impletion of the parties.
After hearing the learned counsel for the respective
parties, Government of Odisha represented through the
Principal Secretary, Finance Department, Lokseva Bhawan,
Bhubaneswar, district Khurda is arrayed as opposite party
no.5.
Since the learned counsel for the State is also
representing such party, no further notice need be served on
the opposite party no.5.
Accordingly, the I.A. is disposed of.
( S.K. Sahoo)
Judge
I.A. No.14867 of 2022
05. This is an application for deletion of the names of the
petitioners nos.2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 10, 12 and 13, namely,
GNKV Rao, Mrs. Chinmayee Senapaty, Prakash Kumar Patel,
Prabhat Kumar Mohanty, Alok Kumar Badoghar, Surendra
Kumar Subudhi, Akshya Kumar Ghadai, Miss Suchishree
Panda, Sankar Chandra Mohapatro and Odishi Lokeswar Rao
// 3 //
respectively from the cause title.
Learned counsel for the State as well as the learned
counsel for opposite party no.2 has no serious objection.
Considering the averments made in the interim
application and on hearing the learned counsel for the
respective parties, the prayer is allowed.
The names of the petitioners nos.2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 10,
12 and 13 are deleted from the cause title.
Accordingly, the I.A. is disposed of.
( S.K. Sahoo)
Judge
W.P.(C) No.20579 of 2017
06. Learned counsel for the petitioners has filed the
consolidated cause title, which is taken on record.
Heard Mr. Budhadeb Routray, learned Senior Advocate
appearing for the petitioners, Mr. R.N. Mishra, learned
Additional Government Advocate appearing for the State of
Odisha and Mr. Bigyan Kumar Sharma, learned counsel
appearing for the opposite party no.2 Orissa Model Tribal
Education Society (OMTES).
Prayer has been made in this writ petition to declare the
resolution dated 28.06.2017 passed in the 26th meeting of
Board of Governors of Odisha Model Tribal Education Society
// 4 //
(OMTES) as invalid and inoperative and for regularization of
the services of the petitioners.
It is the case of the petitioners that they are the
teaching and non-teaching staff of one of the Ekalavya Model
Residential Schools, namely, Ekalavya Model Residential
School, Mahasingi in the district of Kandhamal and they are
continuing since 2004 and the opposite parties are not
regularizing their services against the respective posts, which
are created and sanctioned by the competent authority i.e.
opposite party no.1. It is the further stated that the
petitioners being treated as contractual teachers are getting a
very meager amount towards their remuneration though the
petitioners are all qualified against their respective posts.
Learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that
similar matters were filed before this Court in W.P.(C)
No.20401 of 2017 and W.P.(C) No.20426 of 2017 and both
the matters were analogously heard and disposed of by a
common judgment dated 29.09.2022 and this case is
squarely covered by the ratio laid down in the said judgment.
The copy of the judgment was handed to the learned
Additional Government Advocate for the State and on perusal
of the same, he does not dispute such aspect. The learned
counsel for the opposite party no.2 also concurs with the
submission of the learned counsel for the petitioners.
Taking into account the observation made by this Court
in paragraphs-14, 15 and 16 of the judgment, it is ordered
that the matter needs to be revisited by the Finance
// 5 //
Department keeping in view the peculiar facts and
circumstances as narrated in the writ petition. The writ
petition is therefore, disposed of with a direction to the
Secretary, Finance Department (opposite party no.5) to
consider the proposal of the Administrative Department
afresh in terms of the observations made in the judgment
passed in the connected writ petitions disposed of on
29.09.2022. Such exercise shall be completed within a period
of two months from the date of communication of this order
or on production of certified copy thereof by the petitioners.
Issue urgent certified copy as per Rules.
( S.K. Sahoo)
Judge
RKM
