Bisheswar Dash vs Governing Body Of Kesinga Degree Mahavidyalaya & Ors.

B.P. Routray, J.

Heard the petitioner in person and Mr. T.K. Dash, learned AGA for State – opposite parties.

It is seen from the office note dated 17^th December, 2025 / 28^th January, 2026 that the notices have been served on opposite parties No.1 and 4 as per the postal tracking report. Accordingly, service of notice on said opposite parties is treated sufficient. Said opposite parties No.1 and 4 have not entered their appearance despite sufficiency of service of notice.

Mr. Dash, learned AGA in course of hearing submits that the appeal preferred by the petitioner under Section 10-A of the Odisha Education Act is not maintainable before State Education Tribunal since the petitioner was not receiving any GIA pursuant to his appointment to the 1^st post of Lecturer in Zoology in the College. Being asked, Mr. Dash is unable to satisfy whether such point of maintainability was raised at the initial stage before the Tribunal. The impugned order of the Tribunal under Annexure-9 does not speak anything regarding such question of maintainability and the tribunal has disposed of the case on merits.

Nonetheless, the post to which the petitioner was appointed, was earlier receiving GIA during the incumbency of his predecessor in the post, i.e. 1^st post of Zoology. Therefore, for not receiving GIA by the petitioner, despite the fact that the post was eligible to receive the GIA and in fact received Block-grant earlier, such objection raised by Mr. Dash, learned AGA with regard to maintainability of the appeal of the petitioner under Section 10-A of the Odisha Education Act at this stage is unsustainable. This court accordingly proceeds on merits of the case to decide the dispute.

Admittedly, the petitioner was appointed in the 1^st post of Zoology after the previous incumbent namely Dr. Mamata Mishra left the post. The petitioner was appointed on 26^th October, 2016. He continued in such post till his date of termination, i.e. on 1^st March, 2024. After being terminated from service, the petitioner approached the State Education Tribunal in terms of Section 10-A of the Odisha Education Act. The learned Tribunal, upon adjudication of the dispute came to the finding that the order of rejection of approval of the petitioner dated 9^th November, 2022 (Annexure-12) issued by the Director of Higher Education Department can be treated to fulfill the requirement of approval under Section 10-A of the Odisha Education Act. This order of the Tribunal dated 26^th September, 2025 is subject matter of challenge before this court.

It is submitted by the petitioner that his service was terminated after his continuation in the post for around 8 years without taking prior approval of the authority concerned in terms of the requirement of Section 10-A of the Odisha Education Act and thus, the Tribunal has committed error treating the order of rejection of approval of the Director dated 9^th November, 2022 in the present context for compliance of the requirement under Section 10-A.

Mr. Dash, learned AGA submits that despite the petitioner was appointed since 2016 in the College, but he was continuing in the management post since neither any intimation nor any approval was sent in that regard to the Director of Higher Education. Admittedly the petitioner was not receiving GIA though his predecessor had received the same. It is again submitted by Mr. Dash that an appointment to a post of aided educational institution is to be made through the selection board and in the present case by violating such provisions, particularly the guidelines issued by the government in that regard to meet the contingency in case of emergency, the appointment of the petitioner cannot be treated as in accordance with law. Since he was continuing in the management post, therefore the prior approval of the authority is not required.

Upon hearing both the parties it is seen that the petitioner was appointed to the 1^st post of Zoology by the governing body of Kesinga Mahavidyalaya, Kesinga without following due process of law to get the candidate through the selection board in terms of the provisions contained in the Odisha Education (Selection Board for the State) Rules, 1992. The petitioner continued to receive salary from the management without receiving the GIA till 1^st March, 2024 when his service was terminated. For approval of his service and to receive GIA the petitioner earlier filed WP(C) No.16826 of 2022 and pursuant to the direction issued by this court, the Director of Higher Education considered the case of the petitioner and rejected his prayer for approval and release of GIA, as per the order dated 9^th November, 2022 at Annexure-12. But interestingly, the tribunal while determining the issue of termination effected on 1^st March, 2024 has opined that the order of the Director dated 9^th November, 2022 is treated as compliance of requirement of approval in terms of Section 10-A of the Odisha Education Act. Such approach of the tribunal is found not in accordance with law and thus, it is felt appropriate to remand the matter back to the Tribunal for fresh consideration of the case of the petitioner.

Accordingly, while setting aside the order dated 26^th September, 2025 of the Tribunal, learned State Education Tribunal is directed to re-adjudicate appeal No.4 of 2024 afresh in accordance with law, after granting due opportunity of hearing to all the parties, preferably within four months from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order.

With aforesaid observation and direction the writ petition is disposed of.