Document Fragment View

Matching Fragments

3. The appeal is preferred against the Judgment and Order dated 13.02.2016 passed by the learned Single Judge in WP(C) No. 3093 of 2016.

4. The appellant as a writ petitioner approached this Hon'ble High Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking a direction to the respondents to allow him to officiate as the Head of Mathematics Department in the M.C. College, Barpeta in terms of the Government Office Memorandum dated 05.07.2012. The case of the petitioner is that he joined as a Lecturer in the M.C. College on 01.12.1999 which was approved by the Director of Higher Education on 23.12.1999. During the course of his service, petitioner was granted Senior Grade Scale of Pay. Subsequently, he was recommended by the Departmental Promotion Committee (DPC) for Selection Grade Scale of Pay. The appellant-petitioner states that he is the senior most Assistant Professor in the Mathematics Department of the College and by virtue of his seniority he was made the Head of Mathematics Department of the College. According to the appellant-petitioner, as per the Office Memorandum dated 05.07.2012 although the Headship of the Department is to be assigned on rotation basis in respect of an incumbent being an Associate Professor, however, where there are no Associate Professors then the Senior most Assistant Professor of the Department will be accorded the Headship of the Department. The petitioner contends that as per the Office Memorandum once the Assistant Professor is offered the Headship of the Department there will be no automatic rotation of the Headship like that in the case of the Associate Professor of the Department. Being thus situated, the Principal of the College issued an order sometime in May, 2016 that the Headship of the different Department would be rotated by the person named in same order as per the Governing Body Resolution No. 9 held in the meeting on 19.03.2016. The Headship would be rotated w.e.f. 01.05.2016.

5. Insofar as the Department of Mathematics is concerned, the appellant-petitioner was replaced by Dr. Brojen Das. The petitioner submits that there are only four Assistant Professors in the Department of Mathematics in the College and the petitioner is the senior most, as such, in view of the Office Memorandum dated 05.07.2012 there cannot be any automatic rotation of Headship.

6. The appellant-petitioner also submitted an appeal before the Governing Body to interfere in the matter but there was no response and, as such, he had approached this Page No.# 4/8 Hon'ble Court by way of filing writ petition. The petitioner alleges malice against the Principal of the College and who is also the Secretary of the Governing Body and it is the case of the petitioner that because of the Principal not being favourably inclined towards the appellant- petitioner, he has deliberately undermined the requirements of the Office Memorandum dated 05.07.2012 to replace the appellant-petitioner from the Headship. The appellant-petitioner also relied on the affidavit filed by the respondent No. 9 who is an Associate Professor in the Department of History before the learned Single Judge. In the said affidavit the respondent No. 9 stated that he was a Member of the Governing Body of the College and the decision of the Principal is vitiated by malice towards the appellant-petitioner and the removal of the petitioner from Headship was to ensure that the petitioner does not get his marks due for administrative experiences as the Head of the Department etc., which will be counted at the time of his selection towards his next promotion. The appellant-petitioner submitted that although the Governing Body was in favour of the continuance of the petitioner as the Head of the Department of Mathematics in the College and there was strong disapproval by the President of the Governing Body towards the proposal of the Principal in respect of the removal of the petitioner from the Headship and consequently the President of the Governing Body had also tendered his resignation because of such differences with the Principal.