Dr.Madan Mohan Mahala Vs State of Odisha

Signature Not Verified

Digitally Signed Signed by: BASANTA KUMAR BARIK Reason: Authentication Location: High Court of Orissa, C utta ck Date: 07-Nov-2025 10:51:19

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK

¶4

W.P.(C) No.25509 of 2022

¶5

(In the matter of an application under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India)

¶6

Dr. Madan Mohan Mahala and …. Petitioners others -versus- State of Odisha and others …. Opposite Parties

¶7

Advocate(s) appeared in this case:-

¶8

For Petitioners : Mr. S.S. Das, Senior Advocate For Opposite Parties : Mr. T.K. Dash, A.G.A.

¶9

CORAM: JUSTICE B.P. ROUTRAY

¶10

JUDGMENT

¶11

24^th October 2025

¶12

B.P. Routray, J.

¶13

1. Heard Mr. S.S. Das, learned Senior Advocate for the Petitioners

¶14

and Mr. T.K. Dash, learned Additional Government Advocate for State-Opposite Parties.

¶15

2. Present Petitioners, who are the teachers of different Non-

¶16

Government Aided Colleges have prayed to grant revised UGC Scale of Pay and arrear dues in their favour as to their counterpart in

¶17

W.P.(C) No.25509 of 2022

¶18

Page 1 of 13

¶19

Signature Not Verified

¶20

Digitally Signed Signed by: BASANTA KUMAR BARIK Reason: Authentication Location: High Court of Orissa, C utta ck Date: 07-Nov-2025 10:51:19

¶21

Government Colleges in terms of Annexure-4 by quashing such condition prescribed in Annexure-5 limiting their pay to be notional with effect from 1.1.2016 to 1.10.2017.

¶22

3. Admittedly, the Petitioners are the employees of different NonGovernment Aided Colleges under the Higher Education Department in receipt of UGC Scale of Pay as on 1^st January 2016. Such status of the Petitioners is never disputed.

¶23

4. Government of Odisha in Higher Education Department vide Resolution No.3324 dated 11.2.2019 prescribed revision of pay scales of teachers and equivalent cadres in receipt of UGC Scales of Pay in Universities and Colleges following the revision of pay scales of Central Government employees on the recommendations of 7^th Central Pay Commission. Clauses (3) & (4) of said Resolution dated 11.2.2019 reads as follows:-

¶24

“ 3. The question of revision of pay scales for University and College teachers on the basis of recommendations of Government of India and U.G.C. was under active consideration of Government. After careful consideration, the State Government have been pleased to implement the Scheme of revision of pay scales for University and College teachers in receipt of U.G.C. scale with the following terms and conditions:

¶25

W.P.(C) No.25509 of 2022

¶26

Page 2 of 13

¶27

Signature Not Verified

¶28

Digitally Signed Signed by: BASANTA KUMAR BARIK Reason: Authentication Location: High Court of Orissa, C utta ck Date: 07-Nov-2025 10:51:19

¶29

4. Coverage :

¶30

The revised pay and other related service benefits shall be applicable to all the full-time teachers working in the Universities, i.e. the Utkal University, the Berhampur University, the Sambalpur University, the Fakir Mohan University, the North Odisha University, the Ravenshaw University, the Shree Jagannath Sanskrit University, the Rama Devi Women’s University, the Gangadhar Meher University, Khallikote University, Government Colleges and Non-Government Aided Colleges under Higher Education Department who were in receipt of U.G.C. scales of pay as on the 1^st January 2016.

¶31

This will also be extended to the full-time teachers of Biju Patnaik University of Technology, Rourkela & its constituent Colleges, V.S.S.U.T., Burla, Indira Gandhi Institute of Technology, Sarang under the administrative control of Skill Development & Technical Education Department, Odisha University of Agriculture and Technology under the administrative control of Agriculture and Farmers, Empowerment Department and the teachers of the Government Medical Colleges under the administrative control of Health & Family Welfare Department who were in receipt of U.G.C. scales of pay as on the 1^st January 2016. All the related Departments will prepare separate resolutions following due procedure.”

¶32

5. In terms of aforesaid Resolution under Annexure-4, the revised

¶33

pay and other related revised benefits were released in favour of all such employees working as full-time teachers in the Universities and Government Colleges. But in respect of Non-Government Aided Colleges in receipt of UGC Scales of Pay, it was prescribed in a

¶34

W.P.(C) No.25509 of 2022

¶35

Page 3 of 13

¶36

Signature Not Verified

¶37

Digitally Signed Signed by: BASANTA KUMAR BARIK Reason: Authentication Location: High Court of Orissa, C utta ck Date: 07-Nov-2025 10:51:19

¶38

notification issued by the Government of Odisha in Higher Education Department dated 22^nd October 2019 that the pay of such employees of

¶39

Non-Government Aided Colleges shall be fixed on notional basis with effect from 01.01.2016 to 01.10.2017 and the actual financial benefit shall be released w.e.f. 01.10.2017. Such treatment to the teachers of Non-Government Aided Colleges in receipt of UGC Scale of Pay, different from the teachers of Government Colleges, to pay notional benefit for 21 months is the subject matter of challenge in present writ petition.

¶40

6. Mr. S.S. Das, learned Senior Advocate for the Petitioners submits that once the Government has resolved to treat all the teachers of the State in receipt of UGC Scale of Pay in Universities and Colleges irrespective of the fact of the status of their Colleges either Aided or Government, to allow them revision of pay scales in terms of the recommendation of 7^th Central Pay Commission, its subsequent action by issuance of a notification to deprive them from actual financial benefits, is illegal and arbitrary as the same cannot be denied

¶41

to treat such employees of the Non-Government Aided Colleges different from their counterparts in Government Colleges.

¶42

W.P.(C) No.25509 of 2022

¶43

Page 4 of 13

¶44

Signature Not Verified

¶45

Digitally Signed Signed by: BASANTA KUMAR BARIK Reason: Authentication Location: High Court of Orissa, C utta ck Date: 07-Nov-2025 10:51:19

¶46

7. Conversely, Mr. T.K. Dash, learned Additional Government Advocate for the State-Opposite Parties submits that since the payment of salary to the teachers and other employees of Non-Government Aided Colleges is in the shape of Grant-in-Aid, the actual financial benefits contrary to the decision taken by the Department of Higher Education in their Notification dated 22^nd October 2019, cannot be demanded is a matter of right on the part of such teachers working in Non-Government Aided Colleges. Mr. Dash further submits that since the Government have shortage of funds, it was decided to not extend the actual financial benefits for such period from 01.01.2016 to 30.09.2017 in favour of those employees working in Non-Government Aided Colleges.

¶47

8. It is seen from record that after issuance of the Resolution under Annexure-4 dated 11.2.2019, two notifications dated 26^th July 2019 and 6^th September 2019 were issued for such teachers working in Government Universities and Colleges. The Notification dated 6^th September 2019 prescribes the Rules as Odisha Revised Scales of Pay for University Teachers (UGC Scale of Pay) Rules 2019 and the Notification dated 26^th July 2019 prescribes the Rules as Odisha Revised Scales of Pay (College Teachers) Rules 2019 respectively. By

¶48

W.P.(C) No.25509 of 2022

¶49

Page 5 of 13

¶50

Signature Not Verified

¶51

Digitally Signed Signed by: BASANTA KUMAR BARIK Reason: Authentication Location: High Court of Orissa, C utta ck Date: 07-Nov-2025 10:51:19

¶52

issuance of such notifications under Annexure-6 & 7, actual financial benefits were released in favour of those teachers working in Universities and Government Colleges in terms of the decision taken as per the Resolution dated 11.2.2019 under Annexure-4.

¶53

9. In respect of the employees working in Non-Government Aided Colleges of the State, the Notification dated 22^nd October 2019 under Annexure-5 was issued wherein the actual financial benefits were withheld for them for the period from 01.01.2016 to 30.09.2017, i.e. for 21 months. So, the question arises here for determination is that, whether the Government can treat teachers working in NonGovernment Aided Colleges with discrimination only to stop the financial benefits to them for those periods ?

¶54

10. Rule 9 of Odisha Education (Recruitment and Conditions of Service of Teachers and Members of the Staff of Aided Educational Institutions) Rules 1974 (in short, “1974 Rules”) authorizes the employees working in an Aided Educational Institution to draw the same pay, dearness allowance and other allowances as is admissible to their counterparts in the Government Educational Institutions. Therefore, as seen prima facie, to treat the employees/teachers of Non-

¶55

W.P.(C) No.25509 of 2022 Page 6 of 13

¶56

Signature Not Verified

¶57

Digitally Signed Signed by: BASANTA KUMAR BARIK Reason: Authentication Location: High Court of Orissa, C utta ck Date: 07-Nov-2025 10:51:19

¶58

Government Aided Colleges differently than their counterpart working in Government Colleges is impermissible on the face of Rule 9 of 1974

¶59

Rules.

¶60

11. In K.C. Venkateswarlu and others vs. Government of A.P., Education (Ce.II) Department, Hyderabad and others, 1997 SCC

¶61

OnLine AP 352 , it is observed as follows:-

¶62

“6. The next issue to be considered is whether Clause 5 of the G.O. is in violation of principle of equal pay for equal work. Sections 42 to 46 of the A.P. Education Act, 1982 provides for grant-in-aid. Section 42 says the Government has set apart a sum for giving grant-in-aid within the limits of its economic capacity. Section 43 provides for the authorities which may sanction grant and grant shall be made subject to certain conditions to be specified by the Educational institutions. Section 84 of the Act provides that an employee in a private institution shall be paid in the prescribed manner. G.O.Ms. No. 29 dated 5-2-1987 was issued in exercise of the power conferred under Sections 20 and 21 read with Section 99 of the A.P. Education Act, 1982. These Rules are called A.P. Educational Institutions (Establishment, Recognition, Administration and Control of Institutions of Higher Education) Rules, 1987. Rule 7 provides for staff pattern. Rule 7 sub-rule (2) clause (b) provides that the appointment of teaching and nonteaching staff in the Government educational institutions shall be by way of recruitment through the A.P. Public Service Commission or as per the procedure prescribed by the Government from time to time. Rule 7 of sub-rule (2) Clause (c) provides for the appointment of non-teaching staff in Private Educational Institutions and it

¶63

W.P.(C) No.25509 of 2022

¶64

Page 7 of 13

¶65

Signature Not Verified

¶66

Digitally Signed Signed by: BASANTA KUMAR BARIK Reason: Authentication Location: High Court of Orissa, C utta ck Date: 07-Nov-2025 10:51:19

¶67

should be by the Selection Committee from amongst the candidates sponsored by the Employment Exchange or through News Paper advertisement. Rule 7 Sub-Rule (4) is provided for payment of salaries to staff it says the educational agency of any private institution shall pay salaries to its staff as per the Government scales of pay and by following such procedure as may be prescribed by Government form time to time, in this regard.

¶68

7. From the above it follows that the Government has to set apart depending on its economic capacity in the budget certain amounts for providing grant in aid and grant in aid will be given to Private Educational Institutions subject to fulfilment of conditions laid down by the Government and the staff of the Private Educational Institutions have to be selected by the Staff Selection Commission or by the A.P. College Service Commission in accordance with the procedure prescribed by the Government. It also provides that the salaries of the staff or private educational institutions are as per the Government scales of pay. Therefore, the petitioners who are employed in an unaided college are entitled to the Government scales of pay irrespective of the fact whether the institution is aided or unaided. Accordingly perhaps the institution was paying the scales of pay as indicated in the above paragraphs.

¶69

8. Now I will consider whether the reduction in basic pay on the admission of the institution to grant in aid would amount to violation of the doctrine of equal pay for equal work. In Haryana State Adhyapak Sangh v. State of Haryana , 1990 Supp SCC 306 : AIR 1990 SC 968, the employees of the private institution admitted to grant in aid were before the Supreme Court complaining that the State Government has not implemented the directions issued by the Supreme Court in (1988) 4 SCC 571 : AIR 1988 SC 1663. It was contended that the observations made by the Supreme Court in the

¶70

W.P.(C) No.25509 of 2022

¶71

Page 8 of 13

¶72

Signature Not Verified

¶73

Digitally Signed Signed by: BASANTA KUMAR BARIK Reason: Authentication Location: High Court of Orissa, C utta ck Date: 07-Nov-2025 10:51:19

¶74

said judgment namely (1988) 4 SCC 571 : AIR 1988 SC 1663 were not to the effect that the teachers of the aided Schools must be paid same pay scales and Dearness Allowance as the Teachers in the Government Schools. The said argument was repelled and it was observed that:

¶75

“these observations leave no scope for doubt that this Court has directed that the teachers of aided schools must be paid the same scales of pay and dearness allowance as teachers in Government schools and that the said payment must be made for the entire period claimed by the appellants and the petitioners in these cases.”

¶76

9. The said decision was followed in State of Haryana v. Rajpal Sharma , (1996) 5 SCC 273 : AIR 1997 SC 449. The question involved in this judgment is whether the employees of a private aided institution would be entitled to the same scale of pay and privileges as are available to their counter parts in Government Schools. Following the judgment in Haryana State Adyapak Sangh , (supra) it was held that the teachers employed in aided schools shall be paid the same salary and Dearness allowance as is paid to the teachers employed in Government Schools. In State of Himachal Pradesh v. H.P. State Recognised & Aided Schools Managing , 1995 (2) SLR 725 while reiterating the principle laid down in Haryana State Adyapak Sangh it was observed that:

¶77

“The aided Schools teach the same syllabus and curriculum, prescribe the same books and courses as per Government directions and prepare the students for examinations for which the students studying in Government Schools are prepared. The qualifications of the teachers are prescribed by the State Government and the appointments are made with the approval of the State Government. The fees levied

¶78

W.P.(C) No.25509 of 2022

¶79

Page 9 of 13

¶80

Signature Not Verified

¶81

Digitally Signed Signed by: BASANTA KUMAR BARIK Reason: Authentication Location: High Court of Orissa, C utta ck Date: 07-Nov-2025 10:51:19

¶82

and concessions allowed are strictly in accordance with the instructions issued by the Education Department of the State Government from time to time. The Managing Committee of aided Schools are approved by the State Government and two members of the Committee are appointed by the teachers including disciplinary proceedings and award of punishment etc. are governed by the Rules framed by the State Government.

¶83

It is thus obvious that the State Government has a deep and pervasive control on the aided schools. The Government schools and the aided schools-specially after the Kothari Commission Report have always been treated at par. It has been authoritatively laid down by this Court that the teachers working in the aided schools are entitled to the same salaries and allowances as are being paid to the teachers in the Government Schools.

¶84

It is, therefore, late in the day to say that the teachers in the aided schools are not entitled to parity in the matter of salary, allowances etc. with their counterparts in the Government Schools. The question, for our consideration, however, is whether the State Government or the management is to meet the consequent expenditure.”

¶85

10. Therefore, the applicability of principle of equal pay for equal work depends upon the qualification prescribed to the post, the method of selection or mode of recruitment to the post the nature of responsibility functions and duties attached to the post the control exercised by the authority whether it is the Government or any other authority. Undoubtedly the petitioners discharge the same functions and responsibilities and duties as the teachers in the Government Colleges, the method of recruitment is controlled by

¶86

W.P.(C) No.25509 of 2022 Page 10 of 13

¶87

Signature Not Verified

¶88

Digitally Signed Signed by: BASANTA KUMAR BARIK Reason: Authentication Location: High Court of Orissa, C utta ck Date: 07-Nov-2025 10:51:19

¶89

the Government and it should be in accordance with the rules framed by the Government the disciplinary control is indirectly vested with the Government. Therefore, the petitioners are entitled for the pay admissible to the Government College employees. In the light of the above, the petitioners are entitled to the same scale of pay to which their counter parts in the Government institutions are entitled to.”

¶90

12. The case in hand is though not a true case of equal pay for equal

¶91

work, but the principles thereof can be applied here in the given facts of the case. When the Government decided in the resolution to extend such benefits to all such employees regardless of their status working in Government Colleges or Non-Government Colleges, the subsequent decision in the notification under Annexure-5 contrary to the decision taken by the Government in the resolution under Annexure-4 is not permissible. It is for the reason that, an executive resolution alike Annexture-4 when decides Government’s policy to treat those teachers of Non-Government Colleges equally with the teachers working in Government Colleges, such benefits cannot be taken away by a subsequent notification issued and the contents of the notification cannot be in violation of the decision taken by the Government in the resolution.

¶92

W.P.(C) No.25509 of 2022

¶93

Page 11 of 13

¶94

Signature Not Verified

¶95

Digitally Signed Signed by: BASANTA KUMAR BARIK Reason: Authentication Location: High Court of Orissa, C utta ck Date: 07-Nov-2025 10:51:19

¶96

13. Apart from the above contradiction noticed in the notification

¶97

contrary to the decision taken in the resolution by the Government, the Government cannot treat the employees of Non-Government Aided Institutions differently than the employees of Government Institutions standing counterpart to each other on the face of the provisions contained in Rule 9 of 1974 Rules, which prohibits any such discrimination between the employees of Government Educational Institution and Non-Government Educational Institutions and prescribes to treat equally the employees of both such Government and Non-Government Aided Educational Institutions in the matter of pay, dearness allowance and other admissible allowances. It is seen from Annexure-5 that no such reason has been mentioned to treat the employees of Non-Government Aided Educational Institutions differently from the employees of Government Educational Institutions. However, the simple stand taken in the counter filed by the Government that such a decision is taken based on the financial capability with the State cannot be allowed to stand without any details explained in such respect. The Government has not stated anything in detail about the financial implication arose in case such financial benefit is given in actual in favour of the teachers of Non-Government

¶98

W.P.(C) No.25509 of 2022

¶99

Page 12 of 13

¶100

Signature Not Verified

¶101

Digitally Signed Signed by: BASANTA KUMAR BARIK Reason: Authentication Location: High Court of Orissa, C utta ck Date: 07-Nov-2025 10:51:19

¶102

Aided Colleges, who are already in receipt of UGC Scale of Pay as on 01.01.2016. No detail calculation of financial implication is given by

¶103

the State either in Annexure-5 or in the counter affidavit filed in the present case and therefore, such a stand taken in the counter to deprive the teachers of Non-Government Aided Colleges from getting actual financial benefits of revision of scale of pay for 21 months can well be said as arbitrary and without any reasonable basis on the part of the Government.

¶104

14. In view of the aforesaid analysis, Clause (1)(ii) of Notification

¶105

dated 22.10.2019 (Annexure-5) is accordingly set aside with further direction to extend the actual financial benefits in favour of the Petitioners with effect from 01.01.2016.

¶106

15. The writ petition is disposed of as allowed.

¶107

B.K. Barik/Secretary

¶108

W.P.(C) No.25509 of 2022

¶109

Page 13 of 13

Dr.Madan Mohan Mahala v. State of Odisha

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Dr.Madan Mohan Mahala v. State of Odisha

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Sub Divisional Officer, Tpnodl, Mayurbhanj Vs Rekharani Behera

Ajoy Ketan Mohanty Vs Manoj Satyawan Mahajan, Ias, Collector,Sundargarh

Niharika Grahacharya Vs Bishnupada Sethi, I.A.S

Ramnarayan Mohanty Vs the Land Aquisition

Purusottam Samal Vs Bimala Mishra

Safina Bibi Vs Collector, Bhadrak