Debendranath Nanda vs Chandra Shekhar Kumar

originally appointed as Sanskrit Pandit (Shastri Pandit) in Adarsa Ayurveda Vidyalaya, Cuttack, a Government Aided Institution. The appellant herein got promoted to the rank of Acharya Pandit w.e.f. 31.01.1987 in order to teach students of Acharya classes. His promotion to the post of Acharya Pandit was approved by the State Government vide Order dated 06.12.1994 w.e.f. 31.01.1987.

b) In the year 1984, the State Government took a policy decision to introduce 10+2+3 pattern of education in Sanskrit Institutions functioning in the State of Orissa. Accordingly, Upa-shastri (+2 standard) was introduced in Acharya Institutions.

f) Aggrieved by such cancellation and non-payment of salary for the abovesaid period, the appellant herein filed Original Application No. 1604 of 1996 before the Orissa Administrative Tribunal, Bhubaneshwar. The Tribunal, vide order dated 10.07.1996, admitted the O.A. and stayed the cancellation order dated 06.06.1996 and directed the appellant herein to continue in the Government Sanskrit Institution, Baripada. In pursuance of the said interim order, the State Government, vide order dated 21.11.1996, withdrew the departmental letter dated 06.06.1996 and requested the Director, Secondary Education, Bhubneshwar to hand over the charge of the office of the Head Pandit, Government Sanskrit Institution, Baripada to the appellant herein immediately. The Tribunal, vide final order dated 21.05.1997, dismissed OA No. 1604 of 1996 holding that a teacher of the Aided Educational Institutions cannot be promoted to the post in Government Educational Institutions even though the State Government is paying salary of a teacher under direct scheme and cancelled the promotion of the appellant herein.

h) After several rounds of litigation including filing of various applications before the High Court for the implementation of its order dated 21.07.1997, various communication with the State Government, Department of School and Mass Education, filing of contempt proceedings before the High Court and lastly, the High Court, in CONTC No. 923 of 2010, by impugned order dated 21.07.2011, dropped the contempt proceeding against the respondent herein on the ground that the appellant herein has completed 58 years of age and the dispute as to whether the appellant herein has retired from service or has to continue beyond 58 years cannot be decided in a contempt proceeding.

6) According to the appellant, though the State Government approved him in the post of Acharya Pandit, due to policy decision, he was found surplus and by order dated 16.03.1995, he was adjusted as Lecturer in Government Sanskrit Institution, Baripada (A Degree College) but the said order was cancelled by a subsequent order dated 06.06.1996. Challenging the same, the appellant filed an application being OA No. 1604 of 1996 before the State Administrative Tribunal, Bhubaneshwar. The Tribunal, vide order dated 21.05.1997, dismissed the application filed by the appellant herein. When this order was challenged by the appellant before the High Court by filing a writ petition bearing O.J.C. No. 8397 of 1997, the same was disposed of by order dated 21.07.1997 directing the State Government to consider the case of the appellant following the judgment rendered in a similar case, viz., Smt. Kabita Manjari Kar (supra). It is the grievance of the appellant that in spite of such direction and subsequent orders reiterating the same as well as the decision of the State Government (Minister concerned), School & Mass Education, who considered his case and directed to give him a post equivalent to that he was holding at Government Sanskrit Institution, Baripada, he was neither given necessary posting nor paid any salary for the same which necessitated him for filing contempt petition bearing CONTC No. 923 of 2010 before the High Court. By impugned order dated 21.07.2011, the High Court disposed of the contempt petition by passing the following order:

We dispose of the writ application with a direction to opposite party nos. 1 and 2 to consider the petitioner’s case in the light of decision of this Court in Smt. Kabitamanjari Kar vs. State of Orissa and Others (OJC No. 1667 of 1992 disposed of on 27.4.1995) after considering its applicability to the facts of petitioner’s case. Let the exercise be undertaken within three months from the date of receipt of our order. The question of entitlement of the petitioner shall be decided while adjudicating his case in the light of Smt. Kabita Manjari Kar’s case referred to above.

Requisites along with copy of the judgment referred to above shall be filed for communication of our order to opp. Party nos. 1 and 2 by Monday.

List this case on 2nd August, 2005.

Accordingly, the contempt proceeding is dropped.

12) The appeal is allowed to the extent mentioned above. The appellant is entitled to cost of Rs.25,000/- payable by the Education Department.

NOVEMBER 22, 2012.