Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 1, Cited by 0]

Gauhati High Court

Narendra Nath Deka vs The State Of Assam And 3 Ors on 20 May, 2022

Author: Achintya Malla Bujor Barua

Bench: Achintya Malla Bujor Barua

                                                                 Page No.# 1/5

GAHC010093942022




                              THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT
   (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)

                                 Case No. : WP(C)/3264/2022

            NARENDRA NATH DEKA
            S/O- LATE MOHAN CHANDRA DEKA, R/O- VILL.- KHARAMAKA, MAZBAT,
            DIST. DARRANG, ASSAM, PIN- 784507.



            VERSUS

            THE STATE OF ASSAM AND 3 ORS
            REPRESENTED BY THE COMMISSIONER AND SECRETARY TO THE
            GOVERNMENT OF ASSAM, SECONDARY EDUCATION DEPARTMENT,
            ASSAM, GUWAHATI-781006.

            2:THE ADDITIONAL SECRETARY
             SECONDARY EDUCATION DEPARTMENT
             DISPUR
            ASSAM
             GUWAHATI-781006.

            3:THE DIRECTOR OF EDUCATION
             BODOLAND TERRITORIAL COUNCIL
             KOKRAJHAR
            ASSAM

            4:THE INSPECTOR OF SCHOOLS
             SANKAR NAGAR ROAD
             UDALGURI
            ASSAM-784509

Advocate for the Petitioner   : MR. U K NAIR

Advocate for the Respondent : SC, EDU
                                                                        Page No.# 2/5


                            BEFORE
       HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ACHINTYA MALLA BUJOR BARUA


Date : 20-05-2022

                          JUDGMENT & ORDER (ORAL)

Heard Mr. UK Nair, learned senior counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. R Majumdar, learned counsel for the respondents No.1 and 2 being the authorities under the Secondary Education Department, Government of Assam and Mrs. RB Bora, learned counsel for the respondents No.3 and 4 being the authorities in the Education Department of the BTC.

2. The petitioner was appointed as a science graduate teacher in the Mazbat Girls' ME School Udalguri as per the order dated 04.02.1992. At the relevant point of time, when the petitioner was appointed he was appointed on a regular basis in a ME School which was already provincialised under the law.

3. Under the Shiksha Khetra Scheme, the Mazbat Girls ME School stood amalgamated with the Mazbat Girls High School, Udalguri on 20.01.2018 and was renamed as Mazbat Bidyapith High School, Udalguri. It is given to be understood that the teachers of the Mazbat Girls' High School were provincialised under Assam Venture Educational Institutions (Provincialisation of Services) Act, 2011, (for short, the Act of 2011) and accordingly it is accepted that they were provincialised w.e.f. 01.01.2013. The Additional Secretary to the Government of Assam in the Education Department has issued a communication dated 23.02.2022 which is extracted as below:

Page No.# 3/5 ".....With reference to the subject cited above, I am directed to inform you that in respect of the schools provincialised in the year 2013, the graduate teachers of these schools have not completed minimum 10 years of service as on date which is mandatory for promotion to the post of Headmaster as per Rule 14(2)(b) of Assam Secondary Education (Provincialised Schools) Service Rule 2018 and teachers of these schools (provincialised in the year 2013) shall be completing 10 years of minimum service on 01.01.2023 and therefore the schools provincialised in the year 2013 should be kept out of the purview of promotion of the regular headmasters which is under process till 31/12/2022 and until further orders.
This has the approval of the competent authority."

4. A reading of the extracted portion of the communication dated 23.02.2022 makes it discernible that in respect of such schools which were provincialised in the year 2013 where the graduate teachers have not completed minimum of 10 years of service from the date of provincialisation would be kept out of the purview of promotion on a regular basis to the post of Headmaster. Otherwise, we have not noticed any infirmity in the said communication inasmuch as, the provision thereof appears to be in conformity to Rule 14(2)(b) of the Assam Secondary Education (Provincialised Schools) Service Rules 2018 which has been referred therein. But in the instant case, the factual matrix is that the petitioner was appointed in the year 1992 in a provincialised school and his services were on a regular basis for all other purpose. It only happened that the ME school where he was working stood amalgamated with the High School which was provincialised from the year 2013. The service condition imposed by Page No.# 4/5 the impugned communication dated 23.02.2022 in respect of those graduate teachers whose services were provincialised in the year 2013 cannot be made applicable to the petitioner who has been serving since the year 1992 in a provincialised school and on a regular basis. If it is done, Article 14 of the Constitution of India would be violated to the extent that two classes of people having a reasonable classification with an intelligible differentia with the object at hand would be brought within the same classification.

5. With the above observation, we direct the Additional Secretary to the Government of Assam in the Education Department to re-visit the communication dated 23.02.2022 in respect of those teachers who may have been amalgamated with a high school which was provincialised from the year 2013, but on their own facts were working in a provincialised school and on a regular basis from a period prior to the year 2013.

6. A reasoned order be passed within a period of 15(fifteen) days from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order and after carving out such category of teachers, the bar imposed by the communication dated 23.02.2022 be not made applicable to them.

7. It has been brought to the notice of this Court that the communication dated 23.02.2022 has the approval of the competent authority. If it is so, the order be passed as indicated above be either by the competent authority or by the Additional Secretary with prior approval of the competent authority, but any such order that may be passed either by the Additional Secretary or by the Page No.# 5/5 competent authority shall not violate Article 14 as indicated above.

8. Any other consequential order that may have been passed or to be passed shall also be read in conformity with the order that is required to be passed as indicated above.

9. Writ petition stands disposed of in the above terms.

JUDGE Comparing Assistant