A common legal issue of formidable mo­ment involving analytical exposition of two sets of Rules framed in exercise of powers under Article 309 of the Constitution of Indiato govern the recruitment and conditions of ser­vice of the members of the Assam Second­ary Education (Provincialised) Service has cobbled the proceedings seeking adjudica­tion.

2. The Assam Secondary Education (Provincialised) Service Rules, 1982 (for short, hereinafter referred to as 'the 1982 Rules') and the Assam Secondary Education (Provincialised) Service Rules, 2003 (for short, hereinafter referred to as 'the 2003 Rules') have in succession occupied the do­main of the instant judicial survey-the de­bate being whether a teacher of the afore­mentioned Service and governed by these Rules on transfer on his/ her request from one school to the other forfeits the benefit of past service for reckoning his/her seniority in the new institution. Decisions of this Court pro­claiming irreconcilable views have been ren­dered. Though the 2003 Rules enforced with effect from 11.8.2003 mandate through Rule 24(2)(v) thereof, loss of such seniority to be counted from the date of joining of the teacher in the school to which he/ she had been trans­ferred on his/ her request, such an unequivo­cal provision to this effect is absent in the 1982 Rules. The issue as well is as to the retrospectively or otherwise of this provision of the 2003 Rules.

3. Incidentally, W.A, No. 326/2006 (Abdus Ali Vs. Jiten Thakuria & Ors.) and W.A. No. 447/2006 (Harekrishna Das Vs.Gadadhar Choudhury & Ors.) preferred against the renderings in WP(C) No. 2332/2004 (Jiten Thakuria Vs. State of Assam & Ors.) and WP (C) No. 1912/2006 (Gadadhar Choudhury Vs. State of Assam & Ors.) de­termining against loss of seniority had been dismissed by respective Division Benches of this Court, whereafter, a challenge was made thereto unsuccessfully before the Apex Court in SLP(C) 2797/09 which, as well, was dis­missed in limine. That this dismissal of the SLP by the Apex Court concludes the debate on the issue has not been pleaded in course of the arguments.

4. A Division Bench of this Court com­prised two of us (Amitava Roy, J. and Hon'ble B.D. Agarwal, J.) by its order dated 14.5.2010 noticing the above sequence of events directed the Registry to lay the matter before Hon'ble the Chief Justice for the need­ful to facilitate an authoritative pronouncement on the conundrum by a larger Bench. After the proceedings in hand were laid before this Bench, notice of the reference was duly cir­culated for the information of all concerned leading to the assimilation of the pending ap­peals/ writ petitions to be addressed collec­tively.

5. Having regard to the above backdrop, allusion to the individual facts is inessential, though by way of illustration a sketch of the pleadings in WP(C) Nos. 177/2010 and 1046/2010 from which W.A. No. 131/2010 arises would be outlined as aprefatory edi­fice for a fuller appreciation of the rival con­tentions. Having regard to the Service to which the aforementioned Rules cater, this adjudi­cation would be essentially limited to the mem­bers of the Assam Secondary Education (Provincialised) Service.

6. We have heard mr. N Dutta, Senior Ad­vocate assisted by mr. R. Sarma, Advocate forthe appellant in W.A. No. 131 /20101ead-ing the arguments in endorsement of the plea of retrospectivity of Rule 24(2)(v) of the 2003 Rules and the consequential loss of seniority on request transfer; Mr. M.R. Pathak, (learned Standing Counsel, Education De­partment, Government of Assam for the offi­cial respondents and mr. PK Roy Choudhury, Advocate assisted by mr. NG Kundu, Ad­vocate for the respondent No.5 who has en­tered appearance through a caveat. We have heard as well mr. RC Saikia, mr. GC Phukan, Mr. J. Chetia, Mr. A. Sarma, Mr. A.M. Barbhuiya, mr. D Saikia, Advocates for the petitioners in WP(C) Nos. 3442/2007,3761/ 2006, 4349/2010, 2781/2010, 144/2011,13/2005 and 5310/2005. mr. AS Choudhur