Never Bothered About Fate Of Children: Orissa High Court Dismisses Teacher’s Appeal Against Her Disengagement Over 7 Years Of Unauthorised Absence
The Orissa High Court was considering an Intra-Court appeal filed by a Sikhya Sahayak (teacher) who, having abandoned her service, was disengaged from the post.
While dismissing an appeal of a school teacher challenging her disengagement over her unauthorised absence of 7 years, the Orissa High Court has held that no attempt was made by her to resume her duty, and she never bothered about the fate of school children, whom she had to teach.
The High Court was considering an Intra-Court appeal filed by a Sikhya Sahayak (teacher) who, having abandoned her service, was disengaged from the post.
The Division Bench of Justice Krishna Shripad Dixit and Justice Chittaranjan Dash held, “It is clear that she has made no attempt whatsoever in these years to resume her duty. She never bothered about the fate of school children, whom she had to teach. On the contrary, she was more bothered about her family. What difficulty the community of taught would be put to for want of a teacher leads one to a wild imagination. It is more so in this competitive age. Teachers are revered as builders of nation. Such is the importance any civilized society would attach to the teaching job more particularly that are meant for tender minds. Therefore, our scriptures say ‘gurubhyo namah’, literally meaning ‘salutations to the teacher’.”
M/s. Santosh Kumar Swain represented the Appellant while Addl. Government Advocate S.B. Mohanty represented the Respondent.
Factual Background
The appellant was appointed as Sikhya Sahayak for Upper Primary School, Gobindapur, vide an Engagement letter in 2011. She was disengaged from service in 2020. She filed a petition challenging the disengagement order passed by the Chief Executive Officer-cum- Collector, Zillaparisad, Gajapati, on the ground of unauthorised absence since June 20, 2013, till October 20, 2020, but the same came to be dismissed.
Reasoning
After considering the facts of the case, the Bench noted that the Appellant had unauthorisedly abandoned her service as a teacher from June 20, 2013, for a long period of 7 years.
The Bench held that the conduct of the delinquent Appellant militantly fell short of the obtaining standards and therefore she couldnot be granted any relief in the Constitutional Jurisdiction. “Such a person cannot seek writ remedy provided under the Constitution of India”, it added.
The Bench also observed that abandonment of duties for a long time creates many difficulties in any employment, and the same becomes intolerable in the realm of teaching. “Since, abandonment per se causes cessation of employment, the order of removal entered following such abandonment is formal in character. Such an order does not bring about cessation, but only places on record the factum of cessation of vinculum juris. The umbilical cord thus gets separated by the act of employee and the subsequent order at the hands of employer only recognizes this factum. In other words the order is not constitutive of abandonment but only evidentiary. This subtle difference has to be kept in mind by the stake holders while operating with the cases of abandonment. Otherwise, the interest of public service may be prejudiced”, it added.
Thus, finding the appeal to be devoid of merit, the Bench dismissed the same.
Cause Title: Suchitra Mohapatra v. State of Odisha (Case No.: W.A No. 612 of 2025)
Appearance
Appellant: M/s. Santosh Kumar Swain, Advocate S.C. Bairiganjan,
Respondent: Addl. Government Advocate S.B. Mohanty