BAIRAGI CHARAN SAHOO Vs. STATE OF ORISSA
LAWS(ORI)-2021-2-37
HIGH COURT OF ORISSA
Decided on February 17,2021

Bairagi Charan Sahoo Appellant
VERSUS
STATE OF ORISSA Respondents


Referred Judgements :-

KARUNAKAR BISWAL V. STATE OF ORISSA [REFERRED TO]
JYOSTNA MAYEE BEHERA V. STATE OF ORISSA [REFERRED TO]
BALABHADRA SARANGI V. STATE OF ORISSA [REFERRED TO]
BOMBAY DYEING AND MANUFACTURING COMPANY LIMITED VS. STATE OF BOMBAY [REFERRED TO]
STATE OF MAHARASHTRA VS. BHAISHANKAR AVALRAM JOSHI [REFERRED TO]


JUDGEMENT

DR.B.R.SARANGI, J. - (1.)The petitioner, who was working as Hindi Teacher in Brundaban Vidyapitha, Markandpur in the district of Jagatsinghpur, has filed this writ petition to quash the order dtd. 22/9/2005 passed by the authority in rejecting his claim for grant of time bound advancement scale of pay on completion of 15 years of service in one post, and further seeks direction to the opposite parties to allow him to get the time bound advancement scale of pay on completion of 15 years of service of his initial date of appointment, i.e., 2/7/1982 and pay differential amount with admissible interest within a stipulated time.
(2.)The factual matrix of the case, in hand, is that the petitioner was appointed as Hindi Teacher in Brundaban Vidyapitha, Markandpur in the district of Jagatsinghpur w.e.f. 2/7/1982. The said school became aided educational institution w.e.f. 1/3/1987. As the petitioner acquired higher 'Ratna' qualification on 25/10/1996 from Rastrabhasa Prasar Samiti, Wardha and subsequently HTTC, Hindi Training qualification on 29/12/1999, accordingly the basic scale of pay of the petitioner was enhanced under the Orissa Revised Scale of Pay Rules, 1998. The Government adopted time bound advancement pay scale to the teachers, who completed 15 years of service in the same grade or post prior to 1/1/1995 and, as such, the benefit was extended to similarly situated persons under the Orissa Revised Scale of Pay Rules, 1998. As the said benefit was not extended to the petitioner, he filed representation before opposite party no.3-Circle Inspector of Schools, Jagatsinghpur through proper channel, which was duly forwarded by the Headmaster of the school on 19/2/2003. The claim of the petitioner having not been acceded to by the Circle Inspector of Schools, Jagatsinghpur, he approached this Court by filing W.P.(C) No.6811 of 2003, which was disposed of vide order dtd. 7/1/2004 directing the Circle Inspector of Schools, Jagatsinghpur to consider the representation of the petitioner within a period of two months. 2.1 Since the order of this Court was not complied with, the petitioner filed CONTC No.1457 of 2005. In the same, Circle Inspector of Schools, Jagatsinghpur on being noticed filed show cause. The said contempt petition was finally heard on 18/6/2010 and was dropped taking into consideration the unconditional apology tendered by the Circle Inspector of Schools, Jagatsinghpur for unintentional delay. This Court construing that there was prima facie case of contempt, instead of proceeding under the Contempt of Courts Act, though accepted the show cause filed, but imposed a cost of Rs.1000.00against the then Circle Inspector of Schools, Jagatsinghpur. In the show cause affidavit, it was specifically stated that the petitioner is not entitled to the time bound advancement scale of pay, as he had not completed 15 years of service in one post by 2/10/1989, i.e., prior to the date of withdrawal of scheme by the Government. It was further stated, as the petitioner was allowed trained scale of pay of Rs.4500.007000/- as on 29/12/1999, he would be entitled to the time bound advancement benefit on completion of 15 years, i.e., on 25/12/2014. The rejection of time bound advancement scale of pay was on the ground that the petitioner had been allowed trained scale of pay of Rs.4500.007000/- as on 29/12/1999 after acquiring the higher qualification. Hence this application.
(3.)Mr. B. Parida, learned counsel for the petitioner contended that the time bound advancement scale of pay is applicable on completion of 15 years of service from the date of initial appointment with same "post" or "grade" and admittedly the petitioner joined in the post on 2/7/1982 and due to stagnation in the post and as there is no avenue for promotion, on completion of 15 years of service in the said post, the petitioner is entitled to get the time bound advancement scale of pay after 2/7/1997. It is further contended that the petitioner acquired higher qualification on trained 'Ratna' in the year 1999 and thereafter though his basic scale of pay was enhanced as per Orissa Revised Pay Rules, 1998 by granting the scale of pay of Rs.4500.007000/-, that itself cannot disentitle him to get the time bound advancement scale of pay on completion of 15 years of service from the date of his initial appointment, i.e., 2/7/1982 under the provisions of Orissa Revised Scale of Pay Rules 1998. It is further contended that while passing the order impugned, the authority has not applied its mind to the extent mentioned above and mechanically rejected the claim of the petitioner. It is contended that though the petitioner, prior to filing of the present writ petition, had approached this Court by filing W.P.(C) No.4915 of 2011, but the same was withdrawn on 19/1/2012 to file better application. Consequentially, the present application has been filed where emphasis has been laid on the words "post" or
"grade" in the scale of pay, which an employee had been drawing. It is further contended that the scale of pay may undergo changes during the tenure of service of an employee following revision of pay scale from time to time or the employee's acquiring higher qualification. As per the finance department office memorandum, an employee who has held the same "post" or "grade" for 15 years is to be considered for advancement scale of pay. Therefore, nonconsideration of the same is arbitrary, unreasonable and contrary to the provisions of law. To substantiate his contention, reliance has been placed on the judgment of this Court in the case of Balabhadra Sarangi v. State of Orissa, 2003 (I) OLR 24.



Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.