P. Laxminarayana vs State Of Odisha & Others
2023 Latest Caselaw 10920 Ori

                   IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK

                        W.P.C.(OAC) No. 1435 of 2011

            P. Laxminarayana               ....                  Petitioner


                                              Mr. D.K. Mohapatra,
                                                        Advocate
                                      -Versus -
            State of Odisha & others           ....       Opposite Parties
                                                    Mr. S. Pattanaik, AGA

                      CORAM:
                        JUSTICE SASHIKANTA MISHRA
                                    ORDER_
                                   05.09.2023

Order No.
              1.

This matter is taken up through hybrid mode.

4.

2. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the State.

3. The petitioner being an untrained scheduled caste candidate was engaged as Sikshya Karmi by the District Selection Committee, Ganjam by order dated 03.01.1992. Consequent upon abolition of the scheme of Sikshya Karmi, he was disengaged. Several similarly placed persons were also disengaged. All of them challenged such disengagement by filing original applications before the erstwhile Odisha Administrative Tribunal. Learned Tribunal, in a common order passed in respect of several original applications including O.A. No. 3119 of 1996 filed by the present petitioner, held as follows:-

"5. The respective District Inspector of Schools are therefore, directed to absorb them as Primary School Teachers with effect from 1.12.1994 and disburse the salary of untrained Metric C.T. with effect from that date. If they have already been appointed in the meantime, their appointments shall be deemed to have been given appointment with retrospective effect, i.e., from 1.12.1994. If they have been discharging their duties as such from that date, they are also entitled to get all the service and financial befits as per rules."

4. Despite such order passed by the Tribunal the petitioner was not granted the desired benefit for which he again approached the erstwhile Tribunal in O.A. No.1435(C) of 2011, which has since been transferred to this Court and registered as the present writ petition. The sole prayer of the petitioner before this Court is implementation of the order passed by the learned Tribunal.

5. Mr. D. Mohapatra, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner has relied upon a common judgment passed by a Coordinate Bench of this Court in W.P.C (OAC) Nos.1432, 1433, 1434 and 1436 of 2011 wherein taking note of the assurance given by the State authorities direction was issued to the District Education Officer, Ganjam to issue order of absorption in favour of the petitioners within a period of fifteen days. Mr. Mohapatra submits that his case is squarely

covered by the judgment passed by the Coordinate Bench, which has also been complied with in the meantime.

6. Mr. S. Pattanaik, learned Additional Government Advocate does not dispute the factual position but submits that the absorption of the petitioner shall be contingent upon his fulfilling in the required criteria.

7. After hearing learned counsel for the parties and on going through the judgment passed by the Tribunal in the batch of original applications as also the order passed by the Coordinate Bench in W.P.C (OAC) Nos. 1432, 1433, 1434 and 1436 of 2011, this Court is of the considered view that the petitioner being similarly placed cannot be discriminated by treating him otherwise.

8. In the result, the writ petition is allowed. The opposite party No.3 is directed to issue order of absorption in favour of the petitioner within two weeks from today.

9. The Writ Petition is disposed of.

(Sashikanta Mishra) Judge Signature Not Verified B.C. Tudu Digitally Signed Signed by: BHIGAL CHANDRA TUDU Designation: Senior Stenographer Reason: Authentication Location: Orissa High Court, Cuttack Date: 08-Sep-2023 20:28:17