Dr. Bilkesh Parveen vs State Of Odisha & Ors.

12^th August, 2026

B.P. Routray, J.

Heard Mr. B.K. Mishra, learned counsel for the petitioner, Mr. S.K. Jee, learned Additional Government Advocate for State opposite parties and Mrs. P. Rath, learned senior counsel for opposite party No.4.

The Petitioner, who is working as Reader in English and was allowed to act as Principal-in-Charge-cum-Secretary of Governing Body of Tangi Higher Secondary School, Kotasahi in the district of Cuttack, has challenged the order of the Government dated 15^th December 2025 under Annexure-16, whereby Opposite Party No.4, the Lecturer in Political Science, has been assigned as Principal-in-Charge of Tangi Degree College, Kotasahi in the District of Cuttack. The Petitioner has further prayed for issuance of a direction that no second senior most Lecturer of the college shall be appointed as Principal of +3 wing of the college.

According to the Petitioner, Tangi Higher Secondary School, Kotasahi and Tangi Degree College, Kotasahi is a composite institution consisting of +2 wing and +3 wing, and when she is acting as the Principal-in-Charge of Tangi Higher Secondary School, Kotasahi since 7^th August 2025 as per the order under Annexure-5, no other person should be permitted to act as Principal-in-Charge of Tangi Degree College. It is submitted by the Petitioner that when both the institutions Viz. Tangi Higher Secondary School and Tangi Degree College are one composite institution, two persons cannot act separately as Principal-in-Charge of Tangi Higher Secondary School and Tangi Degree College.

Mr. Mishra, learned counsel for the Petitioner submits that present Petitioner, namely, Dr. Bilkesh Parveen has been appointed on 1^st November 1991 as the Lecturer in English in respect of both +2 wing and +3 wing and as such received the Grant-in-Aid in terms of Grant-in-Order 1994 under the direct payment scheme. At the same time, Opposite Party No.4 is receiving Block-Grant as per GIA order 2009 and subsequent orders, and therefore, the Petitioner is placed at higher pedestal than Opposite Party No.4 in terms of the provisions of The Odisha Education Act and Odisha Education (Recruitment and Conditions of Service of Teachers and Members of the Staff of Aided Educational Institutions) Rules 1974 to be treated as a fulltime employee at par with Government Lecturer/Reader. It is also submitted that since the Petitioner has been en-cadred in the list of common cadre for the State pursuant to Government Notification dated 7^th December 2020 (Annexure-4) securing her placement at Sl. No.272, she is to be treated senior than Opposite Party No.4, who is receiving Block-Grant and yet to be placed in the list of common cadre. Therefore, the action of Opposite Parties assigning the duty of Principal-in-Charge of Tangi Degree College to Opposite Party No.4 is violative of prescribed guidelines and statutory rules. According to his submission, the direction in her favour dated 7^th August 2025 under Annexure-5 entitles her to act as Principal-in-Charge of both the +2 and +3 wings of the composite institution and even without cancelling her duty as Principal-in-Charge as per Annexure-5, the issuance of subsequent order on 15^th December 2025 under Annexure-16 assigning Opposite Party No.4 to act as Principal-in-Charge of Tangi Degree College is erroneous.

The State though has not filed its counter, but it is submitted by Mr. Jee, learned AGA that the institution Viz. Tangi Higher Secondary School, Kotasahi and Tangi Degree College, Kotasahi, being two different and separate institutions, no impediment is there on the part of Government to appoint two Principals-in-Charge for two such different institutions. It is further submitted by Mr. Jee that, the Junior Colleges and Degree Colleges were separate institutions and more particularly the Government of Odisha in notification dated 24^th May 2016 has made it clear prescribing control of School & Mass Education Department in respect of Higher Secondary Schools and Higher Education Department in respect of the Degree Colleges. By virtue of said notification dated 24^th May 2016 (Annexure-A/4) separation of +2 and +3 have been given effect from 1^st July 2016 for smooth administration and control with details stated in that notification. Further, different notifications are being issued from time to time for effective separation of both the wings. Therefore, the claim as advanced by the Petitioner to continue as the Principal-in-Charge of the Degree College on the ground that she has been acting as the Principal-in-Charge of the +2 (Higher Secondary Wing) is thus not sustainable.

Opposite Party No.4 has filed his counter. Ms. Rath, learned Senior Counsel appearing for Opposite Party No.4, submits that the only prayer of the Petitioner to quash the impugned order at Annexure-16 whereby Opposite Party No.4 has been assigned the duty of Principal-in-Charge of Tangi Degree College, without claiming any specific relief to her benefit in express term, is not maintainable in absence of specific pleadings to that effect. It is submitted that the pleadings of the Petitioner do not give any logical sequitur to entertain her prayer relating to the challenge to the order of Government under Annexure-16, since the Petitioner does not claim any specific relief in her favour and even she has not prayed to be appointed as the Principal-in-Charge of Degree College. It is also submitted by Ms. Rath, learned Senior Counsel that, the Petitioner who is directed to act as Principal-in-Charge of the Higher Secondary School cannot claim to act as the Principal-in-Charge of the Degree college, particularly when both the +2 and +3 wings of Tangi College have become two different institutions. In this regard, she by relaying on the notification dated 24^th May 2016 under Annexure-A/4, submits that the Government thereafter, from time to time, has taken several steps for smooth administration and management of the +2 wing as Higher Secondary Schools and +3 wing as Degree Colleges under administrative control of two different departments of the Government. It is submitted that the prayer of the Petitioner assuming her as Principal-in-Charge of the +3 wing is a misconception and since she is junior to Opposite Party No.4 in service, as Petitioner joined on 1^st November 1991 as Lecturer in English and Opposite Party No.4 joined on 21^st February 1991 as Lecturer in Political Science, her claim by way of seniority also does not merit to justify her prayer. It is stated that the status of an employee receiving Block-Grant is no less different from the status of another employee receiving full grant by way of direct payment, in view of the definition of aided educational institutions contained in Section 3(b) of the Odisha Education Act. Therefore, the Petitioner cannot seek a better footing than Opposite Party No.4, either by seniority or by placement as an employee of aided educational institution.

Section 3(b) of the Odisha Education Act defines an aided educational institution. It says that, an aided educational institution means any private educational institution which is eligible to and is receiving grant-in-aid. Section 10(C) of the Odisha Education Act speaks for constitution of a common cadre and the consequences thereof. Sub-section(1) of Section-10 (C) states that the State Government may by order constitute the common cadre in relation to all or any class of employees for all or any category of aided educational institution as may be specified in that order. Sub-section (6) to Section-10(C) states that, an employee belonging to a common cadre may be transferred from one institution to another by the authority in such manner.

The Odisha Aided Educational Institutions Employees Common Cadre and inter-transferability Rules, 1979 gives the procedure of constitution of common cadre and the purpose of such cadre is for determining inter se seniority, transfer, promotion and confirmation confined to the particular cadre.

The Odisha Education (Recruitment and Conditions of Service of Teachers and Members of the Staff of Aided Education Institutions) Rules, 1974 prescribes the conditions of service of the employees of aided educational institutions. Rule 8(3) of said Rules states that vacancies in the post of principals of aided colleges under the fold of „direct payment of full-salary-cost‟ shall be filled up by the Lecturers belonging to the common cadre of aided colleges and the selection shall be made on the basis of seniority in the common feeding cadre and performance. It also provides that the ad hoc promotion to the post of Readers which includes Principals of aided colleges under the system of „direct payment of full-salary cost‟ may however, be made from the concerned common feeding cadre for a period of one year or till the receipt of select list, whichever is earlier, with prior approval of the Government. For better appreciation, Rule 8(3) of 1974 Rules is reproduced bellow:-

In the given facts of the case as the dispute emerges between the petitioner and opposite party No.4 to continue as principal-in-charge of Tangi Degree College, the relevant question falls, at the outset, for determination is, whether both the institutions are to be treated as a composite one or to be treated as two separate institutions.

According to the claim of the petitioner and submissions made on her behalf, Tangi Higher Secondary School and Tangi Degree College are one composite institution and thus the petitioner who is acting as the Principal-in-Charge of Tangi Higher Secondary School should also continue to act as Principal-in-Charge of Tangi Degree College; whereas as per the submissions made on behalf of opposite parties, both the institutions being different, no illegality has been committed by appointing two different Principals-in-Charge for two separate institutions, i.e. one for Tangi Higher Secondary School and another for Tangi Degree College. It is true that the concept of composite college or composite institution has been clarified by virtue of the notification dated 24^th May 2016 under Annexure-A/4 that there should be separation of +2 and +3 wings with effect from 1^st July, 2016 as per the details given in said notification. One of the details as stated in said notification under Annexure-A/4 specifies that the teaching and non-teaching staff of the Junior and Degree Colleges should be separated and put under the administrative control of School and Mass Education Department and Higher Education Department respectively, and the grants in aid for such institutions to be provided separately.

The claim of the petitioner to treat her as the Reader in English in respect of both +2 and +3 wings drawing support from the judgment of this court dated 16^th November 2006 (M/s.Bilkesh Parveen Vrs. State of Orissa and another, 2007 (I) OLR-133) would not help her anyway for it being clarified in the case of Governing Body of Abhimanyu Samanta Singhar College, Balia vrs. State of Orissa and Others, judgment dated 8^th April 2016 passed in WP(C) No.22530 of 2012. In the said case, a similar issue arose before this Court, which is clear from paragraph 1 of said judgment that, whether there is any concept of composite college in the Orissa Education Act, 1969 and the Odisha Education (Establishment, Recognition and Management of Private Colleges) Rules, 1991. In the said case, the petitioner was appointed on 30^th July 1987 and opposite party No.3 was appointed on 24^th April 1992, where the petitioner was functioning as Principal of the College in respect of +2 wing. The petitioner filed the writ petition for issuance of a writ of mandamus to the opposite parties to allow him to function as DDO in respect of +3 wing of the college for the purpose of drawl and disbursement of salary in favour of approved staff of +3 wings. It is important to reproduce the observations of this Court which are as follows:-

(Emphasis supplied)

It is thus now clear that the +2 and +3 wings are two different institutions and therefore, Tangi Higher Secondary School, Kotasahi and Tangi Degree College, Kotasahi are not one institution, rather two different institutions.

Admittedly the petitioner has been directed to act as Principal-in-Charge of Tangi Higher Secondary School, Kotasahi by virtue of order dated 7^th August 2025 under Annexure-5 and opposite party No.4 is now assigned the duties of Principal-in-Charge of Tangi Degree College as per the order of the Government dated 15^th December 2025 under Annexure-16. Coming to the submission of the petitioner that she is senior to opposite party No.4 in service, for she is receiving Grant-in-Aid under the direct payment system, than opposite party No.4, who is receiving Grant-in-Aid in Block-Grant fold, it is relevant to mention here that there would not be any difference between the status of an employee in terms of the definition of aided educational institution.

In the answer to such contention made on behalf of the petitioner that in terms of the guidelines dated 8^th November 2024 issued by Government of Odisha in Higher Education Department, the teachers from the common cadre of Reader grade are only to be appointed as Principal and as the petitioner has been enlisted in the common cadre by virtue of notification dated 7^th December 2020 (Annexure-4) and opposite party No.4 has not yet been en-cadred, the petitioner should be allowed to continue as Principal-in-Charge of Degree College also, it is required to be stated here that the same cannot be taken as a benefit in favour of the petitioner to allow her to continue as the Principal-in-Charge of both +2 and +3 wings. It is for the reason that, both +2 and +3 wings are treated as different institutions and so, when her appointment as Principal-in-Charge of Tangi Higher Secondary School has been directed by the Government, she is considered to be an employee in respect of Tangi Higher Secondary School and not in respect of Tangi Degree College. In terms of Section 10-C of the Odisha Education Act read with Rule 8(3) of 1974 Rules, the constitution of common cadre is in relation to a class of employees or a particular cadre of aided institution. The inference drawn from order dated 7^th August 2025 under Annexure-5 is that, the service of the petitioner is taken in respect of Tangi Higher Secondary School for enlisting her in the common cadre, and this is fortified from the description of her designation mentioned at serial No.272 in the Government Notification dated 7^th December 2020 (Annexure-4), which speaks that she is a Lecturer in English in respect of Tangi Junior Mahavidyalaya, Kotasahi, i.e. Tangi Higher Secondary School, Kotasahi. Thus the petitioner cannot make out a case in her favour in terms of her encadrement in the common cadre as per Annexure-4 to act as the Principal-in-Charge of Tangi Degree College. Therefore, the claim of the petitioner, where she has prayed to quash the impugned order of the government dated 15^th December 2025 under Annexure-16, fails and since she has not prayed specifically to act as the Principal-in-Charge of Tangi Degree College, her challenge to not appoint any second senior most as Principal of the +3 wing does not merit any consideration.

In the result, the writ petition is dismissed.