Orissa High Court | Placement Rules, 2014 Apply to Aided College Lecturers Under Direct Payment System | Says State Must Honour Its Policy and Celebrate Citizens’ Victory
Isabella Mariam
The High Court of Orissa Single Bench of Justice Dixit Krishna Shripad held that the order issued by the Commissioner-Cum-Secretary to Government, Department of Higher Education, dated 30 December 2023, was unsustainable in law and accordingly quashed the same. The Court directed the opposite parties to extend the benefits available under the Odisha Non-Government Aided College Lecturers’ Placement Rules, 2014, to the petitioner. The directive was issued with prospective effect and the opposite parties were mandated to implement the same within a period of eight weeks. The Court further stated that any default or delay in the matter would be viewed seriously if the petitioner was driven into additional litigation.
The petitioner was appointed as a Lecturer in Mathematics on 1 August 1993 in a non-government aided junior college pursuant to an appointment order dated 20 July 1993. The institution was recognized as an aided institution and was included at Serial No. 220 in the list of 255 non-government aided junior colleges receiving grant-in-aid under Annexure-A of the Odisha Grant-in-Aid Order, 2009. The petitioner’s appointment was duly approved against the first post of Lecturer in Mathematics, and he was sanctioned block grant with effect from 1 February 2009 by an order dated 17 February 2010 issued by the Director of Higher Education.
The Odisha Non-Government Aided College Lecturers’ Placement Rules, 2014 were promulgated under Section 10(1) of the Orissa Education Act, 1969 through a notification dated 4 June 2014 with effect from 1 January 2014. These rules provided for placement of lecturers into higher grade (Group-A) pay scale upon fulfillment of eligibility criteria prescribed under Rule 4. The rules specifically applied to lecturers of non-government aided colleges who were in the pay scale of Rs. 9,300 to Rs. 34,800 with Grade Pay of Rs. 4600 under the Odisha Revised Scales of Pay Rules, 2008.
The Odisha Grant-in-Aid Order, 2009 was subsequently amended by notification dated 24 February 2014, introducing the Odisha Grant-in-Aid Order, 2014, with effect from 1 January 2014. This provided that eligible employees of aided educational institutions would be entitled to initial pay with grade pay and five increments in the revised scale under the Odisha Revised Scales of Pay Rules, 2008. Pursuant to this amendment, an order dated 28 November 2019 was issued approving payment of grant-in-aid to the petitioner with effect from 1 January 2018 in the prescribed pay scale of Rs. 9,300 to Rs. 34,800 with Grade Pay of Rs. 4600. His admissible grant-in-aid was fixed at Rs. 38,067.
The petitioner’s claim for placement under the 2014 Rules was not examined on merits in the Lok Adalat held on 1 February 2023. The Additional Chief Secretary directed the Administrative Department to examine the claim as per existing rules within four weeks after providing the petitioner an opportunity of hearing. The matter was thereafter examined by the Commissioner-Cum-Secretary to Government, Department of Higher Education, who rejected the claim by order dated 30 December 2023. The rejection was based on three grounds: (i) the benefit of the 2014 Placement Rules was not available to employees of aided institutions not under the Direct Payment System; (ii) the institution concerned was not fully aided by the government; and (iii) the petitioner was not a member of the common cadre in relation to aided educational institutions.
The petitioner challenged this order before the High Court, contending that the grounds of rejection were factually and legally untenable. He submitted that the institution was in receipt of full grant-in-aid and his pay scale was duly approved under the Odisha Revised Scales of Pay Rules, 2008. He further submitted that there was no statutory requirement for an employee to be a member of a common cadre to claim benefits under the 2014 Rules. Supporting documents, including office orders and pay slips, were placed on record to substantiate these claims. The opposite parties, through the learned Additional Government Advocate, resisted the petition and contended that granting relief would have wider financial implications and open the floodgates of litigation.
The opposite party institution, through its counsel, did not oppose the petitioner’s claims.
The Court recorded that the institution was recognized at Serial No. 220 in Annexure-A to the Odisha Grant-in-Aid Order, 2009 as a non-government aided junior college receiving full grant-in-aid prior to the commencement of the Orissa Education (Amendment) Act, 1994. The Court stated: “Therefore, contra contention of learned AGA running counter to the Statutory Scheme, is liable to be rejected.”
It was observed that the petitioner was in the pay scale of Rs. 9,300 to Rs. 34,800 with Grade Pay of Rs. 4600 as on the cutoff date 1 January 2014. The Court noted the tabular particulars in the order dated 28 November 2019 issued by the Director of Higher Education, recording petitioner’s admissible grant-in-aid at Rs. 38,067 and his increment date as 1 January 2019. The Court held: “It is a case of full Grant-in-Aid.”
On the question of applicability of the Direct Payment System, the Court stated: “It is not the case of Opposite Parties in their pleadings that even after introduction of this new provision, the Institution in question is not following the Direct Payment System.” The Court referred to an order dated 18 June 2020 issued by the Deputy Secretary to Government, Department of Higher Education, addressed to the Principal of the institution, which expressly mentioned the Direct Payment Scheme. The Court observed: “This document is not disputed by the Opposite Parties.”
With respect to the contention regarding membership of a common cadre, the Court referred to Section 10-C of the Orissa Education Act, 1969 and stated: “The State Government may, by order, constitute a common cadre… therefore, it cannot be treated as a mandatory requirement, the word ‘may’ implying abundant discretion with the Government.” The Court found reliance on the Full Bench decision in Patras Soreng v. State of Orissa inapplicable, noting: “The said decision having been rendered on 18.06.1993, section 7-C of the Act was not there on the Statute Book.”
Addressing the argument under Rule 9 of the Odisha Education (Recruitment and Conditions of Service of Teachers and Members of the Staff of Aided Educational Institutions) Rules, 1974, the Court observed: “Nothing has been stated in the counter giving particulars of the drawls of employees of the Government Institutions, working in the comparable cadre to demonstrate that the claim of the petitioner, if allowed, would exceed what is payable to employee of the corresponding cadre in such Institutions.” The Court held that Rule 9 was not intended to curtail statutory benefits otherwise available to employees in aided institutions. “An argument to the contrary would defeat the Placement Order, 2014 and, therefore, does not merit acceptance.”
On the contention of financial burden and potential floodgates of litigation, the Court stated: “What is legitimately held out to the citizen, as a matter of right, cannot be defeated by argument in terrorem.” The Court recorded: “The Government should celebrate citizen’s victory against it, secured in due process of law.” It further observed: “It is open to the State to pre-empt the opening of floodgates of litigations by extending the benefit of the policy on its own without avoidably driving other similarly circumstanced employees to litigation process.”
The Court, however, also recorded: “There is some force in the argument that the Courts have to ensure that the Public Exchequer should not be hurt. It is one of the considerations. This can be ensured by directing the payment of benefits with the prospective effect so that economic hardship of the State is minimized.”
The Court issued the following directive: “In the above circumstances, this writ petition succeeds. A Writ of Certiorari issues quashing the impugned order. The OPs are directed to grant the benefits of Placement Order 2014 to the petitioner with prospective effect, within a period of eight (8) weeks keeping in view the observations hereinabove made. Default or delay shall be viewed seriously, if petitioner is driven to another legal battle. Now, no costs.”
Advocates Representing the Parties
For the Petitioner: M/s. Kunal Kumar Swain, K. Swain & J.R. Khuntia, Advocates
For the Opposite Parties: Mr. D.N. Lenka, Additional Government Advocate; Mr. Mahendra Kumar Sahoo, Advocate
Case Title: Lokanath Behera v. State of Odisha & Others
Case Number: W.P.(C) No. 2062 of 2024
Bench: Justice Dixit Krishna Shripad
