Kasolin Nayak v. State Of Odisha
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK
W.P.(C) No. 6352 of 2022 Kasolin Nayak & others ....
Petitioners Mr. Sameer Ku. Das, Advocate -versusState of Odisha & others ....
Opp. Parties Mr. T.K. Praharaj, Standing Counsel
CORAM:
JUSTICE M.S. SAHOO Order No.
ORDER
31.03.2022 01.
RJ 1.
This matter is taken up through hybrid mode.
2.
The petitioners in the writ petition have stated to be the teaching and non-teaching staff of Rankanidhi Blind, Deaf & Dumb Vidyalaya, At-Gopalpur, P.O.-Ganijang in the district of Bhadrak. They have joined together raising a grievance regarding non-payment of their dues while they are working/continuing in their respective services in the Institution.
3.
It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioners that the institution where petitioners are working has been granted permission by order dated 03.12.2016 (Annexure-3 series) issued by the Director, Department of Social Security & Empowerment of Persons with Disabilities, Govt. of Odisha as well as similar order dated 14.03.2018.
It is submitted that by the Government order dated 03.10.2018 (Annexure-6), the Director, Department of Social Security & Empowerment of Persons with Disabilities has intimated all the Collectors regarding
// 2 // approval of the post for Special Schools under Grant-in-Aid fold of State Government.
4.
Learned counsel for the petitioners relies on the name of the School at Sl. No.15 in the list of "staffing pattern of 52 New Special Schools with financial implication". It is further submitted that the staff list of the Institution has been submitted before the District Social Security Officer, Bhadrak (opposite party no.3) by letter dated 15.02.2019 from the Institution.
5.
It is further submitted on behalf of the petitioners that there has been a rift between the persons in the Management Committee that has led to several rounds of litigation which is the apparent reason, the staffs are not getting any Grant-in-Aid from the Government. It is contended that the authority may be directed to consider the grievance of the petitioners who are going without Grant-in-Aid, though working in the Institution. 6.
Learned Standing Counsel submits that if any representation would be made before the appropriate authority, the same shall be considered in accordance with law and disposed of in due time.
7.
Having heard learned counsel for the parties, the writ petition is disposed of with the following directions:- 8.
The petitioners, if so advised, shall make representation afresh before the appropriate authority, enclosing the documents sought to be relied upon by the petitioners along with copy(ies) of the earlier representation(s), if any.
9.
The authority shall do well to consider the representation(s) of the petitioners in accordance with law for redressal of the grievances of the petitioners and
// 3 // dispose of the same, as expeditiously as possible, preferably within a period of four months from the date of communication of certified copy of the order along with copy(ies) of the documents sought to be relied upon by the petitioner.
10.
The authority shall communicate the order to the petitioners that is to be passed within two weeks. 11.
It is clarified that this Court has not expressed any opinion on the merits of the case, in any manner, whatsoever.
12.
Issue urgent certified copy of this order as per rules. Copy of the order be uploaded in the official Website of the Court.
(M.S. Sahoo) Judge