The High Court of Orissa dismissed a writ petition appealing against the Director of Higher Education's decision to reject a recommendation for the petitioner's enhanced pay scale. The court found the petitioner failed to establish the basis for his claim. No intervention was permitted.
The writ petition is dismissed with no separate order passed.
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.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK
WP(C) NO.17226 OF 2009
Sri Anil Kumar Jena
…. Petitioner
Mr.S.S.Patra, Adv.
-versus-
State of Orissa & anr.
…. Opposite Parties
Mr.U.K.Sahu, Adv.
CORAM: JUSTICE BISWANATH RATH
ORDER
26.10.2021
Order No.
“Under the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case, it is therefore, humbly prayed that this Hon’ble Court may graciously be pleased to :-
Page 1 of 4
// 2 //
Education, vide Annexure-5, Mr.Patra, learned counsel for the
Page 2 of 4
// 3 //
Petitioner giving reference to the plea taken in the Writ Petition visà-vis the documents brought through the additional affidavit made an attempt justifying the recommendation of the Principal. It is for support through the documents taken, a claim is made for interfering with the impugned order at Annexure-5 and setting aside the same thereby directing the Director of Higher Education to accept the recommendation of the Principal.
State taking this Court to the pleading taken in the Writ Petition visà-vis the observation of the Director of Higher Education in disposal of the request of the Principal submitted that the Petitioner failed in establishing the foundation in such claim and it is contended that in absence of which the observation as well as the finding of the Director of Higher Education is not available to be interfered with.
Page 3 of 4
// 4 //
No.1029(A) dated 17.4.1984, this itself cannot establish the
conditions of service and scope in such benefit even such document is not available for at least giving an opportunity to the Court to find the claim of the Petitioner justified or not vis-à-vis considering the justifiability of the recommendation of the Principal involved herein. Again it is unfortunate to record that even after the Director giving a clear observation in his finding, vide Annexure-5 that for the nature of the Post created with particular Scale of Pay preventing the Petitioner to claim any higher Scale for his getting into higher qualification, the Petitioner has not made any endeavor at least to consider the finding of the Director of Higher Education vis-à-vis the term of appointment to find the justifiability of such finding. Petitioner in spite of repeated scope miserably failed in establishing his claim. In view of the above, this Court finds, there is no scope for entering into the dispute raised herein.
7. The Writ Petition thus stands dismissed.
(Biswanath Rath) Judge
M.K.Rout
Page 4 of 4
3 issues framed by the court
Whether the High Court can interfere with the decision of the Director of Higher Education regarding the scale of pay of the petitioner against the recommendation of the Principal.
Whether the petitioner had established a prima facie case or founding material to challenge the non-consideration of his claim for higher scale of pay.
Whether the petitioner made an endeavor to consider the findings of the Director of Higher Education regarding the conditions of appointment.
Sri Anil Kumar Jena
State of Orissa & anr.
Biswanath Rath
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
