Orissa High Court
Rashmita Nanda vs District Project .... Opposite Parties on 16 August, 2023
Author: Sashikanta Mishra
Bench: Sashikanta Mishra
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK
W.P.(C) No. 20598 of 2017
Rashmita Nanda .... Petitioner
Mr. B.S. Tripathy,
Advocate
-Versus -
District Project .... Opposite Parties
Coordinator, RTE, Sarva
Shikshya Abhiyan,
Cuttack and others
Mr. S. Pattanaik, AGA
CORAM:
JUSTICE SASHIKANTA MISHRA
ORDER_ 16.08.2023 Order No. 1. This matter is taken up through hybrid mode.
12.
2. Heard Mr. B.S. Tripaty, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. S. Pattanaik, learned Additional Government Advocate for the State.
3. The petitioner passed Bachelor of Arts in 1994 from Utkal University and is a Diploma Holder in Sangeet Visharad from Pracheen Kala Kendra, Chandigarh during 2104-15. She passed the subject 'Vocal Classical' in 1st division as per Sangeet Visharad Final (5th Year) Diploma Certificate along with mark sheet, issued on 30th September, 2015. Pursuant to an advertisement issued by the District Project Coordinator, Sarva Sikshya Abhiyan (SSA), Cuttack for the post of Art Education Instructor, she submitted her Page 1 of 6 application. After necessary scrutiny her application was rejected on the ground that she had passed from Pracheen Kala Kendra. Being aggrieved, the petitioner has approached this Court seeking the following relief:-
"On the facts and in the circumstances stated above, your petitioner, therefore, prays that this Hon'ble Court be pleased to;
(i) Hold and declare that the petitioner is eligible to participate in the selection process for engagement as An Education Instructor (Performing Art) under SSA, Cuttack and thereby quash the reject list so far as the rejection of the candidature of the petitioner is concerned with a further direction to the opposite party No.1 to forthwith publish the result of the petitioner under valid list of Art Education Instructor (Performing Art) under SSA, Cuttack in Pursuance of advertisement dt. 01.06.2016 of the opp. party no.1
(ii) pass such other order(s) as deemed fit and proper in the bonafide interest of justice and fair play;
And for which act you kindness, the petitioner shall as in duty bound, every pray."
4. Mr. B.S. Tripathy, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that it was entirely wrong on the part of the authorities to reject the petitioner's candidature on the ground that she had acquired the necessary degree from Pracheen Kala Kendra. He further submits that Pracheen Kala Kendra is an institute recognized by the Utkal University and also North Orissa University, besides being recognized by Page 2 of 6 the Government in the erstwhile department of Cultural affairs. All relevant documents have been enclosed to the writ petition in this regard. Mr. Tripathy has drawn attention of the Court to the detailed modalities of selection and eligibilities prescribed for engagement of part time Instructors etc. Mr. Tripathy would submit that in so far as performing Art is concerned the requirement is BFA & BVA Art Degree from B.K. College of Arts and Crafts, Bhubaneswar, Government College of Arts and Crafts, Khalikote and Private Colleges of the State recognized by the State University. Mr. Tripathy submits that the petitioner passed out from the Institute called Kalatirtha at Badamba in the district of Cuttack, which is affiliated to Pracheen Kala Kendra of Chandigarh. The certificate and mark sheet issued by the said institute have been enclosed in the writ petition. As regards, the question of equivalence, it is submitted fairly by Mr. Tripathy that Utkal University subsequently withdrew the equivalence in its meeting of the Equivalence Committee, held on 17.02.2017 (Annexure-11). However, though the advertisement is of the year 2016 but the petitioner had already passed out in the year 2014-15, i.e., prior to the withdrawal of the equivalence. Mr. Tripathy has also relied upon a judgment passed by a coordinate Bench of this Court in W.P.(C) No.4766 of 2019 and batch decided on Page 3 of 6 12.05.2023, wherein the very same issue was decided and it was held as follows:-
"The aforesaid equivalence declaration made by Utkal University vide letter dated 31.08.2001 was valid till the same was withdrawn by the equivalence committee in its meeting held on 17.02.2017. Perusal of the proceeding of the meeting held on 17.02.2017 under Annexure-9 reveals that the equivalence of Diploma/degree awarded by Prachina Kala Kendra, Chandigarh was valid till that date and the recognition granted vide letter dated 04.08.1959/2001 dated 31.08.2001 under Annexure-8 was withdrawn w.e.f., 17.02.2017. In such view of the matter, this Court has no hesitation in coming to the conclusion that the equivalence granted by the Utkal University in exercise of power conferred under Universities Act, 1989 was in force till 17.02.2017."
As such, it is submitted that the case of the petitioner is squarely covered by the ratio of the aforementioned case.
5. Mr. Suvasish Pattanaik, learned Additional Government Advocate submits that the equivalence granted in favour of the institution in question having been withdrawn by the University, the petitioner was rightly not considered. He further submits that in an earlier writ petition, being W.P.(C) No. 19079 of 2013, another Coordinate Bench of this Court had rejected the prayer of the petitioner therein on the same issue on the ground that the Pracheen Kala Kendra, Chandigarh is not a University within the meaning of Page 4 of 6 Section 2(f) of the UGC Act. This Court finds that the judgment of the coordinate Bench as above has been adequately dealt with by the earlier coordinate Bench in its order referred to herein earlier.
6. After perusing the materials on record and after hearing learned counsel for the parties including Mr. K.K. Jena, learned counsel for the North Orissa University, this Court is of the view that the case of the petitioner is squarely covered by the judgment passed by the Coordinate Bench, referred to hereinbefore inasmuch the certificates granted in favour of the petitioner, which are enclosed as Annexure-1 series, by Pracheen Kala Kendra relate to the year, 2013-14 and 2104-15. There is no dispute that at the relevant time, the University had granted equivalence to the said Institute. Such being the case, the rejection of the candidature of the petitioner for the post cannot be sustained in the eye of law.
7. As regards, the relief to be granted to the petitioner, this Court finds that the advertisement was of the year 2016 to fill up 88 posts. There is no material on record to show if all such posts were filled up at the relevant time. Mr. Tripathy submits on instructions that there are some vacancies at present. In such view of the matter, the writ petition is disposed of directing the opposite party No.1 to consider the candidature of the petitioner having due regard to the observation made in Page 5 of 6 this order within a period of four weeks, if any vacancies are available.
8. The CRLMC is accordingly disposed of.
9. Urgent certified copy of this order be granted on proper application.
(Sashikanta Mishra) Judge Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed Signed by: BHIGAL CHANDRA TUDU Designation: Senior Stenographer Reason: Authentication Location: Orissa High Court, Cuttack Date: 21-Aug-2023 12:20:51 Page 6 of 6