High Court orders Grant-in-Aid Benefits for 488 block grant lecturers under 2014 rules

Prameyanews English

Published By : Bratati Baral | August 14, 2025 11:22 AM

The case was filed by petitioner Loknath Behera, whose plea challenged the State Government's previous order denying such benefits. The court, siding with the petitioners, quashed the state’s earlier directive and instructed the government to implement all due benefits within eight weeks.

Bhubaneswar, Aug 14: In a landmark judgment, the Orissa High Court has directed the State Government to extend all benefits under the Grant-in-Aid (GIA) Rules of 2014 to 488 Block Grant college lecturers. The verdict, delivered on Wednesday by Justice D.K. Shripathi, mandates that the eligible lecturers be placed in Group-A and receive the Reader-grade state pay scale.

Follow our WhatsApp Channel for the latest news, alerts & updates – Don’t miss out!

The court’s decision is expected to have far-reaching implications, potentially benefiting thousands of Block Grant lecturers across the state who are in similar positions.

The case was filed by petitioner Loknath Behera, whose plea challenged the State Government's previous order denying such benefits. The court, siding with the petitioners, quashed the state’s earlier directive and instructed the government to implement all due benefits within eight weeks.

During the hearing, the State Government argued that a mass extension of these benefits could exert significant pressure on the state exchequer. However, the court maintained that legal entitlements under the GIA 2014 Rules must be honored.

Importantly, the High Court clarified that while lecturers will be entitled to promotions and service benefits, financial benefits will accrue only from the date of the judgment’s publication, not retrospectively.

Legal experts believe the ruling may open the floodgates for similar claims by other Block Grant lecturers, marking a major development in the ongoing discourse around parity and regularization in the state’s education sector.

Prameya English Is Now On WhatsApp Join And Get Latest News Updates Delivered To You Via WhatsApp

You Might Also Like

More From Related News
The case was filed by petitioner Loknath Behera, whose plea challenged the State Government's previous order denying such benefits. The court, siding with the petitioners, quashed the state’s earlier directive and instructed the government to implement all due benefits within eight weeks.
The case was filed by petitioner Loknath Behera, whose plea challenged the State Government's previous order denying such benefits. The court, siding with the petitioners, quashed the state’s earlier directive and instructed the government to implement all due benefits within eight weeks.
The case was filed by petitioner Loknath Behera, whose plea challenged the State Government's previous order denying such benefits. The court, siding with the petitioners, quashed the state’s earlier directive and instructed the government to implement all due benefits within eight weeks.
The case was filed by petitioner Loknath Behera, whose plea challenged the State Government's previous order denying such benefits. The court, siding with the petitioners, quashed the state’s earlier directive and instructed the government to implement all due benefits within eight weeks.
The case was filed by petitioner Loknath Behera, whose plea challenged the State Government's previous order denying such benefits. The court, siding with the petitioners, quashed the state’s earlier directive and instructed the government to implement all due benefits within eight weeks.
The case was filed by petitioner Loknath Behera, whose plea challenged the State Government's previous order denying such benefits. The court, siding with the petitioners, quashed the state’s earlier directive and instructed the government to implement all due benefits within eight weeks.
The case was filed by petitioner Loknath Behera, whose plea challenged the State Government's previous order denying such benefits. The court, siding with the petitioners, quashed the state’s earlier directive and instructed the government to implement all due benefits within eight weeks.
The case was filed by petitioner Loknath Behera, whose plea challenged the State Government's previous order denying such benefits. The court, siding with the petitioners, quashed the state’s earlier directive and instructed the government to implement all due benefits within eight weeks.
The case was filed by petitioner Loknath Behera, whose plea challenged the State Government's previous order denying such benefits. The court, siding with the petitioners, quashed the state’s earlier directive and instructed the government to implement all due benefits within eight weeks.
The case was filed by petitioner Loknath Behera, whose plea challenged the State Government's previous order denying such benefits. The court, siding with the petitioners, quashed the state’s earlier directive and instructed the government to implement all due benefits within eight weeks.
The case was filed by petitioner Loknath Behera, whose plea challenged the State Government's previous order denying such benefits. The court, siding with the petitioners, quashed the state’s earlier directive and instructed the government to implement all due benefits within eight weeks.
The case was filed by petitioner Loknath Behera, whose plea challenged the State Government's previous order denying such benefits. The court, siding with the petitioners, quashed the state’s earlier directive and instructed the government to implement all due benefits within eight weeks.
The case was filed by petitioner Loknath Behera, whose plea challenged the State Government's previous order denying such benefits. The court, siding with the petitioners, quashed the state’s earlier directive and instructed the government to implement all due benefits within eight weeks.
The case was filed by petitioner Loknath Behera, whose plea challenged the State Government's previous order denying such benefits. The court, siding with the petitioners, quashed the state’s earlier directive and instructed the government to implement all due benefits within eight weeks.
The case was filed by petitioner Loknath Behera, whose plea challenged the State Government's previous order denying such benefits. The court, siding with the petitioners, quashed the state’s earlier directive and instructed the government to implement all due benefits within eight weeks.
The case was filed by petitioner Loknath Behera, whose plea challenged the State Government's previous order denying such benefits. The court, siding with the petitioners, quashed the state’s earlier directive and instructed the government to implement all due benefits within eight weeks.
The case was filed by petitioner Loknath Behera, whose plea challenged the State Government's previous order denying such benefits. The court, siding with the petitioners, quashed the state’s earlier directive and instructed the government to implement all due benefits within eight weeks.
The case was filed by petitioner Loknath Behera, whose plea challenged the State Government's previous order denying such benefits. The court, siding with the petitioners, quashed the state’s earlier directive and instructed the government to implement all due benefits within eight weeks.
The case was filed by petitioner Loknath Behera, whose plea challenged the State Government's previous order denying such benefits. The court, siding with the petitioners, quashed the state’s earlier directive and instructed the government to implement all due benefits within eight weeks.

Copyright © 2024 - Summa Real Media Private Limited. All Rights Reserved.