Writ petition challenging denial of benefits to petitioners in block grant educational institutions. Court remitted matter to authority for consideration of other benefits in light of Ritanjali Giri ratio without expressing opinion on merits.
Matter remitted to authority for consideration of other benefits within four months.
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. 32072 OF 2020
The matter is taken up through video conferencing.
Heard Mr. D.N. Rath, learned counsel for the petitioners and Mr. B. Mohanty, learned Standing Counsel for School & Mass Education Department.
The petitioners have filed this application seeking direction to the opposite parties to treat the petitioners at par with the employees of other aided educational institutions, who have been extended with grant-in-aid in accordance with Grant-in-Aid Order, 1994, and accordingly extend all benefits as applicable to the aided educational institutions within the meaning of Section 3(b) of the Orissa Education Act, such as earned leaves as prescribed under Rule 9 of 1977 Rules, extra ordinary leaves as prescribed under Rule 12 of 1977 Rules, as well as study leaves as prescribed under Rule 13 of 1977 Rules and other benefits as provided under 1977 Rules, Pension Rules, GPF Rules, though the same facilities and benefits were given to the employees of other institutions, which were notified under Section 3(b) of the Orissa Education Act, 1969 pursuant to Grant-in-Aid Order, 1994.
Mr. D.N. Rath, learned counsel for the petitioners has contended that since the petitioners are working in an educational institution receiving block grant, in view of the judgment passed in
Ritanjali Giri @ Paul v. State of Odisha (School & M.E. Deptt.) &
others , 2016 (I) ILR-1162 wherein this Court has already held that the legal heirs of deceased employees of educational institutions receiving block grant are entitled to get compassionate appointment, pursuant to which the Government of Odisha in the Department of School & Mass Education has issued a circular on 01.08.2019 granting benefit of compassionate appointment to the legal heirs of the deceased employees working in fully aided educational institutions and educational institutions receiving grant-in-aid (New)/block grant, therefore, other benefits as claimed in the writ
2
application should be extended to the petitioners.
Mr. B. Mohanty, learned Standing Counsel for School & Mass Education Department contended that in view of law laid down in Ritanjali Giri @ Paul (supra) although benefit of compassionate appointment to the legal heirs of the deceased employees of educational institutions receiving block grant has already been extended by the State Government, pursuant to letter dated 01.08.2019, but so far as other claims as made in this writ application, the petitioners are not entitled to get the same, as because the benefit of Grant-in-Aid Order, 1994 was denied by this Court in State of Odisha v. Sri Lokanath Behera , 2018 (II) OLR 932, which has been confirmed by the apex Court in Civil Appeal No. 7295 of 2019 arising out of SLP(C) No. 8343 of 2019 disposed of on 16.09.2019.
Considering the contentions raised by learned counsel for the parties and after going through the records, this Court is of the considered view that since the benefit of compassionate appointment to the legal heirs of deceased employees of educational institutions receiving block grant has already been extended by the authority, vide circular dated 01.08.2019, therefore, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the matter is remitted back to the authority concerned for consideration with regard to extension of other benefits as claimed in the writ application taking into account the ratio decided in Ritanjali Giri @ Paul (supra) within a period of four months from the date of communication of this order. Needless to mention, if it is found that the petitioners are entitled to get all the benefits, as claimed in the writ application in consonance with the law laid down in Ritanjali Giri @ Paul (supra), the same shall be granted within the time stipulated.
The writ petition is thus disposed of.
.....……………………. Dr. B.R. Sarangi, J.
Ashok
3
2 issues framed by the court
Whether petitioners working in institutions receiving block grant are entitled to benefits applicable to fully aided institutions under Section 3(b) of the Orissa Education Act.
Whether the holding in Ritanjali Giri regarding compassionate appointment extends to other benefits granted under the Grant-in-Aid Order.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Ritanjali Giri @ Paul v. State of Odisha (School & M.E. Deptt.) & others, 2016 (I) ILR-1162Referred¶6
Ritanjali Giri @ Paul v. State of Odisha (School & M.E. Deptt.) & others, 2016 (I) ILR-1162 · Who else cites this
State of Odisha v. Sri Lokanath Behera, 2018 (II) OLR 932Distinguished¶11
Civil Appeal No. 7295 of 2019 arising out of SLP(C) No. 8343 of 2019Referred¶11
Petitioners
School & Mass Education Department
Dr. B.R. Sarangi
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
