The Supreme Court has declined to interfere with a series of Orissa High Court orders that granted eligibility for full grant-in-aid under the Government Grant-in-Aid (GIA) Order of 1994 to employees of aided educational institutions across the state. This significant legal development upholds the rights of teaching and non-teaching staff in private educational institutions to receive full salary grants as originally mandated.
Background of the Grant-in-Aid Scheme
The GIA Order of 1994 was a pivotal policy that provided for full salary grants to eligible teaching and non-teaching staff working in private educational institutions. This order aimed to support educational infrastructure by ensuring financial assistance to staff in aided institutions. However, this order was repealed on February 5, 2004, and replaced with a new policy that limited the grant to partial assistance, sparking numerous legal challenges from affected employees and institutions.
Supreme Court's Dismissal of State Government Petitions
A two-judge bench of the Supreme Court, comprising Justices Dipankar Datta and Satish Chandra Sharma, delivered an order on January 23, dismissing the special leave petitions (SLPs) filed by the state government. These petitions challenged the High Court's ruling dated May 5, 2025. In their order, the bench stated, "We are not inclined to interfere with the impugned judgment(s) and order(s) of the high court; hence, the special leave petitions are dismissed." This decision reinforces the authority of the High Court's judgments and sets a precedent for similar cases.
High Court's Landmark Judgment and Its Implications
The SLPs originated from a batch of appeals that were disposed of by the Orissa High Court, which relied heavily on an earlier landmark judgment delivered on March 19, 2025, by Justice Biraja Prasanna Satapathy. In this judgment, Justice Satapathy held that unaided schools, girls' schools, higher secondary schools, and colleges could not be denied the benefit of the GIA under the 1994 order if their cases had been duly recommended by the concerned directorates prior to the repeal of the scheme.
Justice Satapathy's decision addressed over 100 appeals arising from orders of the State Education Tribunal. He upheld the tribunal's decisions that allowed grant-in-aid claims and set aside those that rejected such claims. Furthermore, he directed state authorities to extend the benefits under the 1994 order and complete the entire exercise within six months, ensuring timely implementation of the ruling.
Uniform Implementation Across Cases
Subsequently, similar appeals were disposed of on May 5, 2025, by applying the principles established in the March 19 judgment. This paved the way for uniform implementation across all related cases, providing clarity and consistency in the application of the grant-in-aid benefits. The Supreme Court's recent dismissal of the state government's petitions solidifies this approach, preventing further delays in granting financial assistance to eligible educational staff.
This ruling is expected to have a profound impact on the educational sector in Orissa, ensuring that employees of aided institutions receive the full financial support they are entitled to under the historic 1994 order. It underscores the judiciary's role in upholding the rights of educational professionals and maintaining the integrity of government schemes designed to bolster the education system.
