Gauhati High Court
Purnabati Brahma vs The State Of Assam And 6 Ors on 6 May, 2019
Author: Manash Ranjan Pathak
Bench: Manash Ranjan Pathak
Page No.# 1/3
GAHC010122342015
THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT
(HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)
Case No. : WP(C) 6378/2015
1:PURNABATI BRAHMA
W/O SHRI ANANTA BRAHMA VILL- NAKARGAON, P.O. PUTHIMARI, P.S.
DOTOMA- 783347, SERVING AS ASSISTANT LANGUAGE TEACHER OF ALAI
HIGH SCHOOL, KOKRAJHAR LALUDUNGA, P.S. and DIST. KOKRAJHAR,
ASSAM.
VERSUS
1:THE STATE OF ASSAM AND 6 ORS
REP. BY THE COMMISSIONER AND SECRETARY TO THE GOVT. OF ASSAM,
EDUCATION SECONDARY DEPARTMENT, DISPUR, GUWAHATI - 781006.
2:THE DIRECTOR
SECONDARY EDUCATION
ASSAM
KAHILIPARA
GUWAHATI - 781019.
3:THE SECRETARY INCHARGE
EDUCATION SECONDARY DEPARTMENT
BTC
KOKRAJHAR- 783370
ASSAM.
4:CHIEF HEAD OF THE DEPARTMENT CHD
DIRECTOR
EDUCATION
KOKRAJHAR- 783370.
5:THE INSPECTOR OF SCHOOLS
KOKRAJHAR DISTRICT CIRCLE
KOKRAJHAR- 783370
ASSAM.
Page No.# 2/3
6:THE HEADMASTER
OF ALARI HIGH SCHOOL
KOKRAJHAR
LAUDUNGA
P.S. and DIST. KOKRAJHAR
ASSAM
Advocate for the Petitioner : MR.R C SAIKIA
Advocate for the Respondent : MR.A K BHUYAN
BEFORE
HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MANASH RANJAN PATHAK
ORDER
Date : 06-05-2019 Heard Mr. R. C. Saikia, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. S. P. Bhattacharjee, learned Standing Counsel, Secondary Education Department for the respondent No. 2 and Ms. B. Bhuyan, learned Standing Counsel, BTC for the respondent Nos. 3, 4 & 5.
Issue involved in this writ petition is with regard to provincialization of service of the petitioner as a Language Teacher in Alari Bodo Medium High School in the district of Kokrajhar as the respondents in the Secondary Education Department did not consider his case.
It is submitted by the petitioner that pursuant to the Government decision under No. ASE/86/2013/Pt.-II/298 dated 25.07.2013, the Director of Elementary Education, Assam, by its Order No. PC.Sec.118/2013/6 dated 21.08.2013, while provincializing the service of teaching and non- teaching staff of said Alari High School in the district of Kokrajhar w.e.f. 01.01.2013 under the provisions of the Assam Venture Educational Institutions (Provincialization of Services) Act, 2011 (in short, '2011 Act'), as amended, did not consider his case for provincialization under the said 2011 Act, though he was serving in the said school since 09.05.2001 as Language Teacher of the said High School since its venture stage.
In this writ petition, the petitioner has prayed for a direction to the respondents to provincialize his service as Language Teacher in said Alari Bodo Medium High School in the district of Kokrajhar that was provincialized in terms of the order dated 21.08.2013.
During the pendency of this writ petition, a Division Bench of this Court, vide order dated Page No.# 3/3 23.09.2016 passed in WP(C) 3190/2012 (Chandan Kr. Neog -vs- State of Assam and others ), declared said 2011 Assam Venture Educational Institutions (Provincialization of Services) Act as un- constitutional and ultra vires. Thereafter, the State Government w.e.f. 11.04.2017 brought into force the Assam Education (Provincialization of Services of Teachers and Re-Organization of Educational Institutions) Act, 2017 (in short, '2017 Act').
Further, pursuant to a decision of a full bench of this Court dated 19.03.2015 in the case of Abdul Gofur Mondal passed in WP(C) 4612/2011, the State Government in the Education Department constituted Educational Tribunals in each of the Districts of Assam presided by its District Judge and Additional District Judges to adjudicate the disputes relating to the teaching and non-teaching staff of such non-Government Institution as well as dispute concerning disciplinary action and claim for provincialization in respect of teaching and non-teaching staff of Venture Educational Institutions within their respective territorial jurisdiction w.e.f. 03.12.2015 that was published in the Assam Gazette on 23.12.2015.
In view of the above, no writ of mandamus can be issued in this proceeding due to non- availability of the said 2011 Act in force and, accordingly, this writ petition, being infructuous, stands disposed of.
However, the petitioner may approach the appropriate Educational Tribunal for consideration of his case for provincialization as per the law in force. Further, the respondents in the Education Department may consider the case of the petitioner for provincialization under the said 2017 Act, if he is entitled for the same in terms of the provisions of said 2017 Act.
With the aforesaid observations and directions, this writ petition stands disposed of.
JUDGE Comparing Assistant