Page 1 of 4. IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK FAO No.340 of 2019 The State Of Odisha and another ..... Appellants Mr. C.M. Singh, ASC -versus- Sri Narayan Dash and another ..... Respondents Represented by Adv. - M/s. S.N. Sharma, G. Rout CORAM: THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ADITYA KUMAR MOHAPATRA ORDER 06.07.2026 Order No. 05. 1. This matter is taken up through Hybrid mode. 2. This appeal has been filed at the instance of the State- appellants challenging impugned order dated 04.10.2018 passed by the learned State Education Tribunal in GIA Case No.394 of 2014. 3. On perusal of the record, it appears that the respondents approached the learned State Education Tribunal by filing GIA Case No.394 of 2014 under Section 24-B of the Orissa Education Act, 1969 with a prayer for release of grant-in-aid in favor of the petitioner as per the grant-in-aid order, 1994 reversing the decision of the opposite party Nos.2 & 3. The learned State Education Tribunal by virtue of its judgment dated 04.10.2018 allowed the Page 2 of 4. application of the respondents, thereby quashing the impugned orders at Annexure-11 & 13 to the GIA application and further, the opposite party Nos.1 & 2 were directed to approve the appointment of the applicant as a lecturer in Mathematics against first post in Kaniha Junior College, Kaniha in the district of Angul and to release grant-in-aid under GIA Order, 1994. 4. Being aggrieved by the aforesaid order, the State has preferred this appeal. The above-noted appeal preferred by the State was initially disposed of by order dated 15.10.2019 in terms of the order passed in FAO No.430 of 2012. However, it appears that no opportunity was given to the respondents while disposing of the appeal, and accordingly, liberty was given to the respondents to file an application for revival of the appeal within thirty days from the date of its disposal. 5. It is apt to mention here that many such similar appeals were disposed of by passing cryptic orders, referring to FAO No.430 of 2012. In those appeals, the respondents filed applications for restoration of those appeals as the final orders were passed without even providing them opportunity. A batch of those appeals including the present appeal was listed before the then Chief Justice. The Hon’ble Chief Justice vide order dated 21.06.2023 disposing of the FAO, has been recalled including FAO No.430 of 2012, i.e., the present FAO. That is how the present FAO has been revived and restored to file. Thereafter, the present FAO was listed before a Coordinate Bench. While issuing notice in the FAO, the learned Coordinate Bench has condoned the delay in filing of the appeal. Page 3 of 4. 6. Today, the matter has been listed for admission. 7. Heard the learned counsel for the appellants as well as the learned counsel appearing for the respondents. 8. Learned counsel for the State, while assailing the order passed by the learned State Education Tribunal, contended that the Tribunal has committed a gross error as he has not taken into consideration the judgment of this Court which was eventually upheld by the Hon’ble Supreme Court, wherein the subject matter was repealed of the GIA Order, 1994. 9. Learned counsel for the respondents on the other hand contended that in a recent decision of the Coordinate Bench of this Court in State of Odisha v. Ratnakar Mohapatra decided in F.A.O. No.509 of 2014 vide judgment dated 19.03.2025 which has been upheld by the Hon’ble Supreme Court, learned Coordinate Bench has upheld the validity of the application which was either recommended or pending before the competent authority prior to the GIA order was repealed in the year 2004. In such view of the matter, the learned counsel for the respondents contended that the case of the appellants is squarely covered by the ratio laid down in FAO No.509 of 2012 in Ratnakar Mohapatra’s case (supra). 10. Considering the submission made by the learned counsels appearing for both the sides, while dismissing the present appeal, this court directs that the State-Appellants shall re-consider the case of the Respondents in terms of the judgment dated 19.03.2025 of the Co-ordinate Bench in Ratnakar Mohapatra’s case (supra), which was confirmed in appeal by the Hon’ble Supreme Court, and Page 4 of 4. particularly, in terms of the direction given by the Co-ordinate Bench of this Court as well as the Hon’ble Supreme Court. In the event the Respondents are found to be eligible to receive such Grant-In-Aid and that there is a recommendation in their favour, necessary consequential order(s) be passed in accordance with law, within a period of three months. 11. With the aforesaid observation, the F.A.O. stands disposed of. ( Aditya Kumar Mohapatra ) Judge S.K. Rout