Orissa High Court Dismisses Appeal of Teacher Absent for Seven Years, Deems Conduct 'Intolerable'
The Orissa High Court has taken a firm stance against prolonged absenteeism in the education sector, dismissing a writ appeal filed by a 'sikhya sahayak' or contractual teaching assistant who challenged her disengagement after being absent for nearly seven years. In a recent judgment, the court emphasized that such abandonment of duties is particularly unacceptable in teaching roles.
Court's Strong Rebuke on Teacher Absenteeism
A division bench comprising Justice Krishna Shripad Dixit and Justice Chittaranjan Dash upheld a previous order from July 4, 2023, by a single judge. The bench stated, "Abandonment of duties for a long time creates a lot many difficulties in any employment, hardly needs to be stated. Therefore, the same becomes intolerable more particularly in the realm of teaching. Abandoners, therefore, are not favoured by courts subject to all just exceptions into which the argued case of the appellant does not fit."
The court highlighted that the appellant, who was appointed at an upper primary school in Gobindapur under Gajapati district in 2011, had remained absent without authorization since June 20, 2013. She was formally disengaged in October 2020, but the bench noted her absence spanned approximately seven years, during which she made no effort to resume her duties.
Details of the Case and Court's Findings
The appellant's counsel argued that her representation against the disengagement in 2021 had not been considered by the authorities. However, the bench pointed out that she had unauthorisedly abandoned her service as a teacher from June 20, 2013, and a formal disengagement order was issued on October 20, 2020. The court observed, "It is clear that she has made no attempt whatsoever in these 7 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."
In its order dated February 20, which was uploaded on February 26, the court refused to grant relief under constitutional jurisdiction. It stated, "The conduct of delinquent appellant militantly falls short of the obtaining standards and therefore she cannot be granted any relief in constitutional jurisdiction. Such a person cannot seek writ remedy provided under the Constitution of India."
Endorsement of Administrative Action
The bench endorsed the action taken by the district administration, specifically the collector-cum-chief executive officer of the zilla parishad in Gajapati. The court noted that the official had rightly issued a formal removal order after considering the appellant's conscious abandonment of her solemn duties. Consequently, the appeal was dismissed, reinforcing the importance of accountability in the education sector.
This judgment underscores the judiciary's intolerance towards prolonged absenteeism, especially in teaching positions, and serves as a reminder of the responsibilities that come with such roles. The court's decision aims to uphold standards and ensure that educators prioritize their duties to students and the education system.
