Gauhati High Court
Menaka Giri vs The State Of Assam And 2 Ors on 23 February, 2022
Author: Sanjay Kumar Medhi
Bench: Sanjay Kumar Medhi
Page No.# 1/7
GAHC010057302021
THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT
(HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)
Case No. : WP(C)/2113/2021
MENAKA GIRI
D/O BISHNULAL GIRI,
VILLAGE KARIBIL NAPALI,
PO KAWRIPATHAR, PS HELEM, DIST BISWANATH, ASSAM
VERSUS
THE STATE OF ASSAM AND 2 ORS
REPRESENTED BY THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY TO THE GOVT. OF ASSAM,
ELEMENTARY EDUCATION DEPARTMENT, DISPUR GUWAHATI 781006
2:THE COMMISSIONER AND SECRETARY
TO THE GOVT. OF ASSAM
ELEMENTARY EDUCATION DEPARTMENT
DISPUR
GUWAHATI 781006
3:THE DIRECTOR
SARBA SIKSHA ABHIYAN MISSION
ASSAM
KAHILIPARA
GUWAHATI 1
Advocate for the Petitioner : MR J PAYENG
Advocate for the Respondent : SC, SECONDARY EDUCATION
Page No.# 2/7
WP(C)/1617/2021
KULARAM MORANG AND 5 ORS
S/O- RANGAI MORANG
VILL- LISANG SOCIETY
P.O. SILAPATHAR
DIST.- DHEMAJI
ASSAM
2: SUNIL PEGU
S/O- PARAMA PEGU
VILL- KEKURI POMUA
P.S. DHAKUAKHANA
DIST.- LAKHIMPUR
ASSAM
3: BHARAT SING KUMBANG
S/O- BHIM KANTA KUMBANG
VILL- CHATIYANA KUMBANG GAON
P.O. BOGUM
DIST.- LAKHIMPUR
ASSAM
PIN- 787055
4: RINAMONI DAS
D/O- NABIN DAS
VILL- KUMARKATA
P.O. NARAGAON
P.S. PANIGAON
DIST.- LAKHIMPUR
ASSAM
5: MADHOV PEGU
S/O- LT. LOKNATH PEGU
VILL- PAKANIA
P.O. SALMORA TINIALI
P.S. NORTH LAKHIMPUR
DIST.- LAKHIMPUR
ASSAM
PIN- 787052
6: RITUMONI SAIKIA
D/O- MITHARAM SAIKIA
C/O- RUPJYOTI BORGOHAIN
HILOIDARI
KHUBALIA
DIST.- DHEMAJI
Page No.# 3/7
ASSAM
PIN- 787057
VERSUS
THE STATE OF ASSAM AND 3 ORS
REP. BY THE PRINCIPAL SECY. TO THE GOVT. OF ASSAM
SECONDARY EDUCATION DEPTT.
DISPUR
GHY-06
2:THE COMM. AND SECY. TO THE GOVT. OF ASSAM
SECONDARY EDUCATION DEPTT.
DISPUR
GHY-06
3:THE DIRECTOR OF SECONDARY EDUCATION
ASSAM
KAHILIPARA
GHY-19
4:DEPTT. OF PERSONNEL (B)
REP. BY THE PRINCIPAL SECY. TO THE GOVT. OF ASSAM
DISPUR
GHY-06
------------
Advocate for : MR J PAYENG
Advocate for : SC
EDU appearing for THE STATE OF ASSAM AND 3 ORS
WP(C)/1910/2021
DEVORJYOTI DOLEY AND 4 ORS
S/O APUDHAR DOLEY
VILLAGE KULAPARAR ANU NAGAR
PO ARADHAI
DIST DHEMAJI ASSAM
2: HEMANTA SUKAI
S/O DHANESWAR SUKAI
VILLAGE NATUNGAON
PO AND PS JAGIROAD
DIST MORIGAON
ASSAM
3: KIRON PEGU
S/O UMA KANTA PEGU
VILLAGE AND PO NA ALI
PS PANIGAON
Page No.# 4/7
DIST LAKHIMPUR
ASSAM
4: MRS. RASHMIREKHA BHARALI
D/O HIRANYA KUMAR BHARALI
HENJINAGAR
BAMGAON
DIST DHEMAJI
ASSAM 787059
5: MRS. RAJU KR. DOLEY
C/O DURLAV DOLEY
VILLAGE MOHMARA
PO AND PS JONAI
DIST DHEMAJI
ASSAM
787060
VERSUS
THE STATE OF ASSAM AND 3 ORS
REPRESENTED BY THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY TO THE GOVT. OF ASSAM
ELEMENTARY EDUCATION DEPARTMENT
DISPUR GUWAHATI 06
2:THE COMMISSIONER AND SECRETARY
TO THE GOVT. OF ASSAM
ELEMENTARY EDUCATION DEPARTMENT
DISPUR GUWAHATI 781006
3:THE DIRECTOR OF ELEMENTARY EDUCATION EDUCATION
ASSAM
KAHILIPARA
GUWAHATI 19
4:DEPARTMENT OF PERSONNEL (B)
REPRESENTED BY THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY TO THE GOVT. OF ASSAM
DISPUR GUWAHATI 781006
------------
Advocate for : MR J PAYENG
Advocate for : GA
ASSAM appearing for THE STATE OF ASSAM AND 3 ORS
WP(C)/1977/2021
SANJU DAS
S/O. GOPAL DAS
VILL. FAKIRBASTI
P.O. TELIBASTI
P.S. HOJAI, ASSAM.
Page No.# 5/7
VERSUS
THE STATE OF ASSAM AND 3 ORS
REP. BY THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY TO THE GOVT. OF ASSAM
ELEMENTARY EDUCATION DEPTT.
DISPUR
GUWAHATI-781006.
2:THE COMMISSIONER AND SECY.
TO THE GOVT. OF ASSAM
ELEMENTARY EDUCATION DEPTT.
DISPUR
GUWAHATI-781006.
3:THE DIRECTOR OF ELEMENTARY EDUCATION
ASSAM
KAHILIPARA
GUWAHATI-781019.
4:DEPARTMENT OF PERSONNEL (B)
REP. BY THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY TO THE GOVT. OF ASSAM
DISPUR
GUWAHATI-781006.
------------
Advocate for : MR J PAYENG
Advocate for : SC
EDU appearing for THE STATE OF ASSAM AND 3 ORS
BEFORE
HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR MEDHI
ORDER
Date : 23-02-2022 Heard Shri J Payeng, learned counsel for the petitioners. Also heard Shri U Sharma and Shri PK Bora, learned Standing Counsel, Secondary and Elementary Education Department, respective. Shri B Gogoi, learned counsel appears for the SSA.
2. The petitioners in these writ petitions belong to ST(P)/SC/OBC categories and in response to the advertisements dated 13.11.2019, 19.09.2020 and 24.09.2020, they Page No.# 6/7 applied for the posts of Assistant Teacher/Hindi Teacher/Graduate Teacher for Primary/Lower Primary/Upper Primary/Higher/Higher Secondary Schools in various districts of Assam. They were allowed to appear in the recruitment process and they were found to be qualified at all levels but when it was time for them to be appointed, they were denied appointment on the ground that they did not clear the minimum educational qualification/TET prior to crossing the existing upper age limit of 40 years of age.
3. Being aggrieved, they have come before this Court through these writ petitions.
4. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioners that the Government of Assam had issued a corrigendum dated 20.02.2021 in the Assam Gazette removing the requirement of passing the required educational qualification before attaining the age of 40 years. Therefore, appointment orders may be issued to the petitioners, if they are found to be qualified otherwise. The learned counsel also submitted that in similar cases i.e., WP(C)/345, 409, 457, 622, 646, 664 and 670/2021, this Court had directed consideration of appointment of the petitioners who were similarly situated. As such, the same relief that was granted in those writ petitions may be granted to the present petitioners.
5. The learned Standing Counsel, Education Department fairly submit that the petitions may be disposed of with a direction to consider the cases of the petitioners keeping in view the facts and circumstances stated above in case they are found to be qualified otherwise and in terms of the earlier decided cases.
6. In the aforementioned cases, this Court has referred to a decision rendered by a 3 Judges Bench of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of WPIL Ltd., Ghaziabad Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise, Meerut, UP , reported in (2005) 3 SCC 73 Page No.# 7/7 wherein it has been held as follow:
"The learned counsel for the appellant is also right in relying upon a decision of this Court in CCE Vs. Wood Craft Products Ltd. In that case, this Court held that a clarificatory notification would take effect retrospectively. Such a notification merely clarifies the position and makes explicit what was implicit. Clarificatory notifications have been issued to end the dispute between the parties."
7. On the backdrop of the aforesaid discussions, these petitions are allowed with a direction that the respondent authorities should consider the cases of the petitioners for appointment and based upon their positions in the Merit List, appointments be offered to the petitioners expeditiously and in any case within an outer limit of 45 days from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order.
8. The petitioners are given liberty to obtain a certified copy of this order and submit the same along with a copy of the writ petition and its annexures before the respondent authorities for doing the needful.
9. Accordingly, the writ petitions are disposed of.
JUDGE Comparing Assistant