Petitioners seeking engagement as Sikhya Sahayak challenged the selection panel ignoring their experience. The Court dismissed the writ, granting liberty to adjust the petition after the petitioner approaches the competent authority.
Liberty to adjust the writ petition and approach the opposite party for a decision after providing an opportunity of being heard.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
W.P.(C) No.460 of 2014
7.8.2015 Heard.
The petitioners who are Scheduled Tribe candidates having the requisite qualification
i.e., +2 with experience of working as an Education Volunteer/Language Instructor in Multiling
ual Education School has approached this Court for consideration of their candidature and abso
rption as Sikhya Sahayak in view of the decision of the Government to engage Sikhya Sahayak fo
r MLE Programme.
The grievance of the petitioners is that the Government has taken a decision to engage
Sikhya Sahayak for MLE Programme prescribing certain eligibility conditions, one of the eligi
bility conditions is that working experience as an Education Volunteer/Language Instructor in
MLE School is also to be considered.
According to the petitioners since they have got wide experience as Education Voluntee
r/Language Instructor in MLE School for imparting better education in Saura language.
But without considering this aspect of the matter, the authorities have published a pa
nel list on the basis of the higher educational qualification ignoring the experience of the p
etitioners.
The case of the petitioners is that since Sikhya Sahyak is required to be engaged in M
LE School under MLE Programme the experience acquired by the petitioners will be of paramount
relevance for imparting better education as such the decision of the authorities in engaging t
he candidate having higher education qualification ignoring experience in particular school is
absolutely improper.
It has been submitted by learned counsel for the petitioners that the petitioners are
still working in the School having MLE Programme, leaving them engaging other candidates havin
g higher education qualification will frustrate entire spirit of the scheme.
Learned counsel for the petitioner has further submitted that there are still vacancie
s existing in different Schools under MLE Programme.
Learned counsel for the School and Mass Education Department has raised preliminary ob
jection that the petitioner has directly approached this Court without raising their grievance
before the competent authority.
However, he has fairly submitted that if the petitioner will approach before the compe
tent authority, decision in accordance with law shall be taken.
On such submission, the writ petition is disposed of giving liberty to the petitioners
to approach before the opposite party no.2-State Project Director, OPEPA, Bhubaneswar within
three weeks from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order along with copy of the wr
it petition.
The concerned opposite party shall take decision after providing opportunity of being
heard to the petitioners within a reasonable period preferably within eight weeks from the dat
e of receipt of representation.
It is made clear that this Court has not entered into the merit of the claim of the pe
titioners.
S. N. Prasad, J.
4
4
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the petitioners can directly approach the Court without exhausting remedies by approaching the competent authority regarding eligibility criteria for Sikhya Sahayak engagement.
Scheduled Tribe candidates
State Project Director, OPEPA, Bhubaneswar
S. N. Prasad
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court