1. This bunch of writ petitions, involving the same parties and are also inter-connected (or overlapping?) with each other, were heard together and are now being disposed of by this common judgment.

2. The reliefs claimed in W.P.(C) No. 4612 of 2011 are to prepare the gradation list of Assistant Teachers of Jana Kalyan VLP School by treating the petitioner as the senior-most among them after setting aside the existing list submitted by the Head Teacher of the School and direct the respondent authorities to provincialize the service of the petitioner as the 1st Assistant Teacher of the School. In W.P.(C) No. 6109 of 2012, the reliefs claimed therein are to quash the DISE Data for the period 2010-2011 in respect of the staffing pattern of the School and update the DISE Data by including the name of the petitioner as the 1st Assistant Teacher of the School. In W.P.(C) No. 2272 of 2013, the reliefs claimed are to set aside the Resolution No. 1 dated 5-8-2008 resolving to appoint the respondent No. 8 (Abdul Kalam Azad) as Assistant Teacher of the School and the consequential order dated 20-6-2008 appointing the respondent No. 8 in his place and quash the list of Assistant Teachers at Annexure-8 including the name of the respondent No. 8 in his place and direct the respondent authorities to provincialize the service of the petitioner. The reliefs claimed in WP(C) No. 6590 of 2014 are to set aside the recommendation of the District Scrutiny Committee, Dhubri dated 13-12-2012 for provincializing the services of the respondent No. 6 and 8 and the consequential order dated 19-9-2013 provincializing the services of the respondent No. 6 and 8 as the Assistant Teachers of the Schols..

3. The case of the petitioner is that the School under the name of “Jana Kalayan VLP School” (“the School” for short) was established on 1-1-1987 with his name shown as its founder Assistant Teacher as evident from the list of schools under 26 Bilasipara West LAC (Annexure-1) and the particulars of VLP schools for the year 2010 (Annexure-2). In the year 2010, he filed an application under the Right to Information Act, 2005 to the Sub-Divisional Officer (Civil), Bilasipara requesting him to furnish him information about the number of teachers, number of students, the proceedings of the Managing Committee of the school and the inspection note of the school authority to the School. But no such information has been supplied to him till now though he was driven to move from pillar to post to obtain such information. In the meantime, the respondent No. 6 submitted the particulars of the School for financial assistance by showing the name of the respondent No. 8, who was appointed only in 2010, as the Assistant Teacher of the School by dropping the name of the petitioner. The petitioner thereupon lodged a complaint with the respondent No. 2 on 6-1-2011 in connection therewith by stating that he has been working as the Assistant Teacher of the School since 1987, but no action has been taken by him till now. According to the petitioner, the respondent No. 8 was appointed as Assistant Teacher of the School on 10-3-2008, whereas he has been working as such since 1987. His name was reflected in the inspection note from 1987 to 2010 so much so that he is entitled to be treated as the 1st Assistant Teacher: the respondent No. 8 and 9 should be treated as the 2nd and 3rd Assistant Teacher. It is the service of the petitioner, according to the petitioner, which should have been provincialized as the Assistant Teacher of the School, and the gradation list of the teaching staff should have been prepared in order of seniority to that effect. It is the case of the petitioner that being the founder teacher of the School, he had donated Rs. 50,000/- for construction of the building and other infrastructures of the School.

4. In the meantime, he has become overage, and unless his service is provincialized, there is no prospect for him to get other public employment at his age. The Sch

Click Here to Read the rest of this document