Orissa High Court
Ranjit Ranjan Nayak vs State Of Odisha on 12 March, 2013
HIGH COURT OF ORISSA: CUTTACK
W.P.(C) No. 226 of 2007
In the matter of an application under Articles 226 and 227 of the
Constitution of India.
--------
Ranjit Ranjan Nayak
S/o Sri Hrusikesh Nayak,
At- Bodhakhandi Mellak,
P.O. Sisilo, Via- Balakati,
Dist: Khurda. ... Petitioner
-Versus-
State of Odisha,
Represented by the Commissioner-Cum-
Secretary, School & Mass Education Dept.
Bhubaneswar, Dist. Khurda & others. ... Opp. parties
---------
For Petitioner : M/s. Banshidhar Satpathy,
T.K. Nayak & A. Ali
For Opp. parties : Standing Counsel
(For School & Mass Education Dept.)
--------
P R E S E N T:
THE HONOURABLE SHRI JUSTICE B.N.MAHAPATRA
Date of Judgment: 12.03.2013
B.N. MAHAPATRA, J.This writ petition has been filed with a prayer to issue a writ in the nature of mandamus commanding opposite parties, particularly opposite party No.6-Block Development Officer (for short, "B.D.O."), Balianta to allow the petitioner to join in Bodakhandi Melak Project Primary School, Balianta treating his qualification Diploma in Special Education (Mental Retardation) equivalent to C.T. qualification. 2
2. Petitioner's case in a nutshell is that he applied for the post of Sikshya Sahayak in respect of Balianta Block pursuant to advertisement published in Odia Daily, "The Samaja" on 14.10.2006. His application was duly scrutinized and he was selected and engagement order was issued in his favour vide Order No.1917 dated 23.12.2006 by the Collector-Cum-Chief Executive Officer, Zilla Parishad, Khurda. Even though the petitioner has been appointed as Sikshya Sahayak and posted in Badakhandi Melak Project Primary School, the B.D.O., Balianta has not allowed him to join in his service on the ground that the certificate produced by the petitioner is Diploma in Special Education (Mental Retardation) which is not equivalent to C.T. qualification of Board of Secondary Education, Odisha. Being aggrieved, the petitioner approached Opp. Party No.1-Commissioner-Cum-Secretary, School and Mass Education Department, Odisha and opposite party No.3-Collector, Khurda by filing representation for issuance of order to the B.D.O., Balianta to allow him to join in the place of posting. Since no action was taken on such representation, the petitioner has filed this writ petition.
3. Mr. B. Satpathy, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner passed Matriculation in 2nd Division in the year 1993. He passed +2 Science in 1996 and +3 Science in 1999. He passed Diploma in Special Education (Mental Retardation) conducted by Rehabilitation Council of India, Ministry of Social Justice and Employment, Government of India in 2006. According to Mr. Satpathy, 3 such qualification is equivalent to C.T. qualification of the Board of Secondary Education, Odisha.
It was submitted that the Diploma in Special Education (Mental Retardation) has been recognized by the Directorate of Teachers Education and SCERT, Odisha, Bhubaneswar vide order dated 18.06.2005 and treated the same as equivalent to Certified Teachers (C.T.) offered by the Board of Secondary Education, Odisha. The Government of Odisha in Women and Child Development Department vide order No.5203 dated 7.3.2005 directed all the Collectors of the districts to treat the Diploma course in Special Education as equivalent to Certified Teachers (C.T.) qualification recognized by the Education Department. Since the opposite parties have accepted application filed by the petitioner and after scrutinizing the same, issued the order of engagement to the petitioner, they are estopped from saying that qualification possessed by the petitioner is not equivalent to C.T.
4. Mr. Satpathy further submitted that the Hon'ble High Court in the case of Prakash Kumar Rout and others vrs. State of Odisha and others in W.P.(c) No.16637 of 2006 disposed of on 08.08.2008 has categorically held that Diploma in Special Education is equivalent to Certified Teachers Course of Board of Secondary Education. Further Board of Secondary Education vide Notification No.1258 dated 25.10.2011 declared that the Diploma in Special Education is equivalent to C.T. Course of B.S.E.( Odisha).
4
In W.P.(C) No.17820 of 2009 and batch of cases this Court has held that Diploma in Special Education provided by Rehabilitation Council of India is equivalent to C.T. Course of Board of Secondary Education, Odisha inasmuch as the same has already been declared by the Government of Odisha in C.D. & R.R. Department and Women and Child Development Department. Therefore, there is no bar or any impediment in giving posting order in favour of the petitioner giving him engagement with retrospective effect with all other consequential benefits. Concluding his argument, Mr. Satpathy submitted to allow the prayer made in the writ petition.
5. On the contrary, Mr. B.P. Tripathy, learned Standing Counsel appearing on behalf of opp. parties submitted that the petitioner belongs to the General Category with +3 Science and Diploma in Special Education (D.S.E.) qualification. The equivalency of Diploma in Special Education with C.T. so far has not been clarified by the School and Mass Education Department, though the equivalency has been accepted by Women & Child Development Department. When the selection process was going on, the Government in School and Mass Education Department vide letter No. 20300 dated 18.10.2006 questioned the equivalency of Diploma in Special Education with C.T. course. In view of the said letter dated 18.10.2006, it could not be concluded that the candidates with Diploma in Special Education will be engaged treating the Diploma in Special Education as equivalent to C.T. Further, another reference has been made to Government vide letter No.48 dated 6.1.2007 5 for clarification in the matter. According to the decision of the District Selection Committee, candidature of the applicants having Diploma in Special Education was not cancelled and they were allowed to remain in the panel. The present petitioner is among such empanelled applicants. Because of the ambiguity in Diploma in Special Education qualification, the B.D.O. was advised not to entertain the order of engagement issued to the petitioner. Though there are other selected candidates with Diploma in Special Education qualification, no candidate has so far been engaged in 2006-07 Recruitment Year in Khurda District. Unless clarification from the Government in School & Mass Education Department is received, the prayer of the petitioner cannot be singularly considered as it relates to a policy decision of the Government having State wide common applicability. Therefore, the petitioner has to wait till a final decision is taken by the Government in the matter.
6. On the rival contentions of both parties, the following questions fall for consideration by this Court:
(i) Whether qualification of Diploma in Special Education (Mental Retardation) conducted by the Rehabilitation Council of India (C.R.C.I.), Ministry of Social Justice and Employment, Government of India is equivalent to Certified Teachers(C.T.) offered by the Board of Secondary Education, Odisha ?
(ii) Whether the petitioner having qualification of Diploma in Special Education (Mental Retardation) is entitled to be engaged as Sikshya Sahayak in Balianta Block pursuant to the engagement order No.1917 dated 23.12.2006 6 issued by the Collector-cum-Chief Executive Officer, Zilla Parishad, Khurda ?
7. To decide question no.(i) as to whether the Diploma in Special Education (Mental Retardation) conducted by Rehabilitation Council of India, Ministry of Social Justice and Employment, Government of India is equivalent to C.T. qualification offered by the Board of Secondary Education, Odisha, I need not retain myself for any longer period. In the case of Prakash Kumar Rout and others vrs. State of Odisha and others in W.P.(C) No.16637 of 2006 disposed of on 8.8.2008 this Court has held that Diploma in Special Education is equivalent to Certified Teachers Course of Board of Secondary Education. The Board of Secondary Education, Odisha itself vide Notification No.1258/ 25.10.2011 has clarified that Diploma in Special Education is equivalent to C.T. Course of Board of Secondary Education, Odisha. Moreover, persons having qualification of Diploma in Special Education, who were engaged as Sikshya Sahayaks under the Collector-Cum-Chief Executive Officer, Zilla Parishad, Khurda have approached this Court in W.P.(C) No.11115 of 2010 apprehending their disengagement challenging the decision of Board of Secondary Education, Odisha relating to rejection of equivalency of Diploma in Special Education course with that of the C.T. course. In that case, this Court placing reliance on the letter/ notification No.1258 dated 25.10.2011 held that since the Board of Secondary Education, Odisha has clarified that Diploma in Special Education is equivalent to C.T. Course of Board of Secondary Education, 7 there is nothing left for adjudication of the petitioner's case which became infructuous. Further, this Court vide judgment dated 18th January, 2012 passed in W.P.(c) No.17820 of 2009 and batch of cases held that Diploma in Special Education provided by Rehabilitation Council of India is equivalent to C.T. qualification offered by the Board of Secondary Education, Odisha. It is not the case of opp. parties that they have challenged the judgments of this Court cited above before the Hon'ble Supreme Court. Thus, the said judgments have attained the finality.
8. In view of the above, this Court is of the opinion that Diploma in Special Education is equivalent to C.T. qualification of Board of Secondary Education, Odisha.
9. Question no.(ii) is with regard to the petitioner's entitlement to be engaged as Sikshya Sahayak having qualification of Diploma in Special Education. Undisputedly pursuant to the advertisement dated 14.10.2006 inviting applications from eligible candidates for the post of Sikshya Sahayak, the petitioner submitted his application. After scrutinizing the said application, the petitioner was selected and engagement order was issued in his favour vide engagement Order No.1917 dated 23.12.2006 by the Collector-Cum-Chief Executive Officer, Zilla Parishad, Khurda, but he was not allowed to work as Sikshya Sahayak on the ground that it could not be concluded that the candidates with Diploma in Special Education will be treated as equivalent to C.T. Course. In their counter affidavit Opp. Parties stated 8 that as per decision of the District Selection Committee, the candidature of Diploma in Special Education applicants was not cancelled and they were allowed to remain in panel and the present petitioner is one among such applicants.
10. In view of the answer to question no.(i), there is no controversy that the Diploma in Special Education is equivalent to C.T. Course of Board of Secondary Education, Odisha. Therefore, there is no impediment for opp. parties to give engagement and allow the petitioner to work as Sikshya Sahayak.
11. In view of the above, Opp. Parties are directed to give engagement to the petitioner to work as Sikshya Sahayak in Balianta Block pursuant to the appointment order No.1917 dated 23.12.2006 issued by the Collector-Cum-Chief Executive Officer, Zilla Parishad, Khurda.
12. In the result, the writ petition is allowed. No costs.
...........................
B.N.Mahapatra, J.
Orissa High Court, Cuttack Dated 12TH March, 2013/ssd