A
B
STATE OF ORISSA AND ANR,
v.
OAMODAR. NA YAK AND ANR.
MARCH 31, 1997'
(K. RAMASWAMY AND D.P. WADHWA, JJ.]
Se,:..,ice Law-Grant-in-aid Scheml~Entiilen;e,;t to salary 'under tiie
Scl1em~espq11de11t appoi11ted as. Lecture~uestion 'whether he wds en-
titled to receive lf'ant-i11-aid for payment of salary from ilie date of his acquir-
e i1ig qualification 01' froli1 the date of i11itial 'ajJpointmeiit-Held admittedly,
since the first respo11de11t 011 the date of his appointnlei;t w~s not pm:sessing
the reqitisite qualification and acquired the sa1i1e only 011 March :21; l989, he
will be eligible to the be1tefit of the grant-in~aid ~.e.f April 1, 1989 ai1d'oi1-
.
·.
·,
'
wardS.
D
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION : Civil Appeal No. 2666 of
1997.
.
.. ·
' .
From the Judgment and Order dated 23.4.96 of the Orissa High
Court in O.J.C. No. 3548 of 1996.
E
P.N. Misra for the Appellants.
The following Order of the Court was delivered :
The report of the Registry indicates that the service is complete.
However, the respondents are not appearing either in person or through
F
counsel.
Leave granted.
The question limited to the notice is : whether the respondent would
be entitled to payment of salary under the Grant-in-Aid Scheme from the
G date of initial appointment till he improved his qualification or from the
date of his acquiring the qualification? The admitted position is that
respondent No. 1 came to be appointed as a lecturer in 1976. The Govern-
ment issued clarification on January 5, 1987 that unqualified lectures having
minimum second class, i.e., 48% or above and below 54% of marks in P.G.
H examination and appointed on or after 1.8.1977 in recognised non-Govern-
456
I
STATE v. DAMODAR NAY AK
457
I
ment Colleges would be eligible to receive· grant-in-aid. The Resolution A
dated September 13, 1983 issued by the Government prescribes the
qualification for recruitment of .L'ecturers of affiliated Colleges which
indicates that "candidate not holding an M. Phil degree should possess a
high second Class Master's degree, i.e., 54% marks and a second class
Honours/Pass in the B.A./B. ,Cpm./B:S~. examinafion.", Respondent No. 1 B
secured 53.9% marks, ~hich is almost equivaleiit of 54% niarks, on March
21, 1989. Therefore, the. question arises : whether the second respoµdent
is entitled tO receive grant~in-aid
0
for payirient of salary to the first respon-
dent from the date of his acquiririg qualification or from the date of initial
appointment? Admittedly, sl~ce the first respondent on the date of his
appointment was not possessing the requisite qualification anci acquired c.
the\ame only oh March 21, 1989 he will be eligible to th~ benefit of the.
grant-in-aid w'.e.f. Apr1il, 1989 dnd onwards. .
·. . . .
. .
. .
The appeal is accordingly allowed and the order of the High Court
passed· on April 23, 1996 in OJC No. 3548/96, to that extent stands
modified. No costs. ·
· ·
O·
T.N.A.
Appeal aJ.lowed.
. .
-
.,
i'
i
'
,, ...
..
1
••
. i
Lex