Orissa High Court
Dr. Ganesh Chandra Kund vs State Of Odisha & Others .... Opp. ... on 7 August, 2025
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK
W.P.(C) NO. 41243 OF 2023
with
W.P.(C) NO.28782 OF 2022
In the matter of applications under Articles 226 & 227 of the
Constitution of India.
In W.P.(C) No. 41243 of 2023
Dr. Ganesh Chandra Kund .... Petitioner
-Versus-
State of Odisha & others .... Opp. Parties
Advocates appeared in this case:
For Petitioner : M/s. Jaydeep Pal, A.Pal, S.R. Pradhan,
C.Mohapatra & M. Ghosh, Advocates
For Opp. Parties : Mr. J.K. Ray,
Addl. Standing Counsel [O.P.1]
Mr. P.M. Pattajoshi, Advocate
[O.Ps.2 to 6]
In W.P.(C) No. 28782 of 2022
Dr. Ganesh Chandra Kund .... Petitioner
-Versus-
State of Odisha & others .... Opp. Parties
Advocates appeared in this case:
For Petitioner : M/s. Jaydeep Pal, A.Pal, S.R. Pradhan,
C.Mohapatra & M. Ghosh, Advocates
For Opp. Parties : Mr. J.K. Ray,
Addl. Standing Counsel [O.P.1]
Page 1 of 8
Mr. P.M. Pattajoshi, Advocate
[O.Ps.2 to 6]
CORAM:
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE DIXIT KRISHNA SHRIPAD
JUDGMENT
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Decided on : 07.08.2025
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
PER DIXIT KRISHNA SHRIPAD, J.
Petitioner, who holds M.Sc. in Statistics, was selected as a
Part Time Teacher with effect from 17th January, 2000 pursuant to his
application against the advertisement dated 14.05.1999 at Annexure-1
followed by notice dated 12th January, 2000 at Annexure-2. He had
knocked at the doors of this Court earlier in W.P.(C) No.14252 of
2008, wherein a Coordinate Bench directed the OPs to consider his
absorption in service under the OUAT Statute, 1966. The University
having challenged the said order in Writ Appeal No.400 of 2017, a
Division Bench of this Court having partly allowed the same diluted
the direction for the creation of post and absorption, specifically
stating that the petitioner should be continued in the service till his
superannuation or he quits.
2. A direction was also added to the effect that the case of the
petitioner shall be considered for absorption, if and when posts are
created in terms of the said Statute. The University created certain
posts, vide Notification dated 11.04.2023 preceded by the sanction of
Government, vide letter dated 19.12.2022. It is told at the Bar that this
sanctioning was after securing the approval of Finance Department of
the Government. Despite creation of posts, the request of petitioner for
absorption having not been considered in terms of direction of the
Division Bench issued in the subject Writ Appeal filed by the
University itself.
2A. Petitioner has moved this petition with the following prayer
column:-
"It is therefore, most humbly prayed that your
Lordships may graciously be pleased to consider the facts
stated in the Writ Application, and be pleased to quash the
resolution no.4254 dated 28.07.2021 under Annexure-20
and letter dated 19.01.2022 issued by Govt. of Odisha,
Department of Agriculture and F.E. under Annexure-24.
And further issue necessary directions to the
Government of Odisha, Agricultural Department to take a
decision with regard to sanctioning of the post of Assistant
Professor, Statistics with Computer knowledge, as has been
requested by the University vide its letter no.21392/UAT
dated 11.09.2014 in a time bound manner and from the date
of receipt of such approval from the government, the
University shall take steps for regularization of the
petitioner's services in a time bound manner as the
petitioner was appointed in the year 2000 under Annexure-2
in due process of law and imparting teaching on contractual
basis for the last 24 years.
And further be pleased to hold that the Dean's
Committee has no statutory sanction to override the decision
of the Board of Management dated 01.08.2014 passed vide
resolution no.3857."
3. After service of notice, the O.P.-University having entered
appearance through its Panel Counsel has filed the Counter resisting
the petition essentially contending that although posts are created,
petitioner cannot be absorbed therein inasmuch as the prescribed
qualification happens to be M.Sc. Statistics with Economics & NEET.
4. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and having
perused the petition papers, this Court is inclined to grant indulgence
in the matter as under and for the following reasons :-
4.1. The O.P.-University is established under the provisions of the
Orissa University of Agriculture and Technology Act, 1965. The
University has promulgated a set of statutes in exercise of power
delegated by the Act. Under the provisions of Act, the Board can
create posts on the recommendation of Academic Counsel however,
subject to sanction by the Government. Accordingly, a set of posts has
been created, vide Notification dated 11.04.2023 and certain
educational qualifications too are prescribed. The vehement
submission of learned counsel for the University that although posts
are created, petitioner cannot be absorbed in them for want of
prescribed educational qualification, is bit difficult to countenance.
True it is, that it is the prerogative of employer to create posts and to
prescribe requisite qualification therefor. However, when it comes to
absorbing already long serving employees sans any complaint
whatsoever, such a plea cannot be countenanced to prevent
absorption.
4.2. An argument to the contrary of what is observed above would
be unjust and arbitrary, more particularly when the prescription of
requisite qualifications is of recent origin, i.e, 2023 whereas the
petitioner has been serving the University, as already mentioned
above, since last quarter century. Twenty-five years are a substantial
part of human life and at least as a concession of shortness of life,
relaxation ought to have been granted by the University regard being
heard to the sweat and blood, which it extracted from the petitioner all
these years. It hardly needs to be stated that experience has its own
advantage especially in the realm of teaching. Much of meaning of life
is experience itself, to say the least.
4.3. The Petitioner's Counsel is right in submitting that in the
earlier round of litigation, the University had preferred a challenge in
Writ Appeal No.400 of 2017, wherein the division Bench modifying
the order of learned Single Judge rendered in the petitioner's W.P.(C)
No.14252 of 2008 held he should be continued in service of
University and that whenever posts are created, he should be
considered for absorption therein. It was only for the want of regular
posts, the Division Bench had interfered with the order of learned
Single Judge, otherwise arguably the University had no case in Writ
Appeal and eventually, the order of learned Single Judge would have
attained confirmation at the hands of said Bench as rightly contended
by the learned counsel for the petitioner.
4.4. A model employer like the University, which is held to be a
State under Article 12 of the Constitution of India vide Ujambai -vrs.-
State of Utter Pradesh : AIR 1962 SC 1621, has to conduct itself as a
Model Employer and its policy should not be higher and fire.
Whatever additional qualifications that are prescribed only in April,
2023, need not come in the way of considering petitioner's case for
absorption, when he has rich experience of a quarter century. The long
experience itself can constitute a qualification, more particularly when
petitioner has acquired doctorate degree in Statistics way back in 2012
itself.
4.5. In public employment, though service begins with contract,
gradually it attains status, vide Tulsiram Patel vrs. Union of India :
AIR 1985 SC 1416. A person having Post-Graduation coupled with
PhD and experience of twenty-five years of teaching is an asset to the
Institution, and therefore, he cannot be allowed to stagnate with the
same status throughout till he attains the age of superannuation. An
argument to the contrary would dampen the spirit of teachers, which
in turn would affect the interest of community of taught and therefore,
cannot be countenanced.
In the above circumstances, both the writ petitions succeed.
A Writ of Mandamus issues to the University to positively consider
the case of petitioner for absorption in an appropriate post by relaxing
the freshly prescribed qualifications in the light of his long coupled
with PhD qualification, within a period of eight weeks. Delay shall be
viewed very seriously, at the next level of legal battle, if at all, the
petitioner is driven to.
It is open to the answering Opposite Parties to solicit any
information or documents from the side of the Petitioner, as required for
taking a decision on the subject representation. However, in that guise
delay shall not be brooked.
Now, no costs.
Web copy of this judgment to be acted upon by all concerned.
(Dixit Krishna Shripad)
Judge
Orissa High Court, Cuttack
The 7th day of August, 2025/Manoj
