SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Article Pause Article
judgment-img

2018 Supreme(Gau) 220

IN THE HIGH COURT OF GAUHATI, ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH
M.R.PATHAK, J.
Ratna Dutta @ Ratna Roy W/o Sri Sudip Dutta – Petitioner
Versus
The State of Assam and Others – Respondents
WP (C) No. 1296 of 2017
Decided On : 14-03-2018

Advocates Appeared:
For the Petitioner: Ms. S. Roy.

: Statutory rules prevail over executive orders in matters of appointment and selection processes.

Headnote:Provincialised - Appointment of Principal in National Higher Secondary School - Assam Secondary Education (Provincialised) Service Rules, 2003, Rule 12, Rule 13, Rule 8(4), Rule 16 - The judgment discusses the application of the Assam Secondary Education (Provincialised) Service Rules, 2003, particularly focusing on the rules related to the recruitment and selection process for the appointment of a principal in a provincialized higher secondary school. It emphasizes the importance of adhering to statutory recruitment rules and executive orders in such appointments.

Fact of the Case:

The petitioner challenged the selection and appointment process for the post of Principal in a National Higher Secondary School due to non-compliance with statutory recruitment rules.

Finding of the Court:

The court found that the petition was premature as no final decision had been made by the relevant authorities regarding the appointment.

Issues:

Prematurity of the writ petition challenging the selection and appointment process for the post of Principal.

Ratio Decidendi:

The statutory rules prevail over executive orders in matters of appointment and selection processes.

Final Decision:

The writ petition was disposed of with an observation for compliance with relevant provisions before finalizing the selection to the post of Principal.

JUDGMENT AND ORDER :

1. Heard Mr. Debasish Nandi, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. Abani Deka, learned standing counsel, Education Department for respondent Nos. 1 to 5, Mr. Tapan Roy, learned counsel for respondent No. 7 and Mr. Unni Krishnan Nair, learned senior counsel assisted by Ms. Niharika Shyamal, learned counsel for respondent No. 8.

2. Though notice of this case has been served on respondent No. 6 but, he has not appeared in the matter. Hence the matter proceeded ex-parte against said respondent.

3. The matter relates to selection and appointment to the post of regular Principal in National Higher Secondary School, Lumding, a provincialised Higher Secondary School, pursuant to the Advertisement dated 21.06.2016.

4. The petitioner herein is serving as a Post Graduate/Subject Teacher in Chemistry in said National HS School for last more than 28 years. Being qualified and eligible, the petitioner along with other candidates applied for the said advertised post of Principal of said National HS School. Though interview for the said advertised post was initially fixed on 30.06.2016 but, as the term of the School Management and Development Committee (SMDC) of said National HS School expired, the interview for the said post was deferred. After constitution of the new SMDC of the said school, a School Selection Committee of the said HS School was constituted for the interview of said post, which was later held on 14.12.2016.

5. The State Government in the Secondary Education Department formulated the Assam Secondary Education (Provincialised) Service Rules, 2003, a statutory recruitment rule under Article 309 of the Constitution of India so as to regulate the recruitment and conditions of service of the persons appointed to the Assam Secondary Education (Provincialised) Service, which is in force since 12.08.2003. Rule 12 of said 2003 statutory recruitment Rules relates to Recruitment of Principal in the Higher Secondary/Higher Secondary and Multi Purpose School and Qualification whereas Rule 13 of the said 2003 Rules relates to Procedure of Selection of Principal. Further, Rule 8 (4) of 2003 Rules provides for constitution of School Selection Committee (SSC), whereas Rule 16 of said 2003 Rules relates to the State Selection Board and constitution of its Chairman and Members.

6. For interview to the post of regular Principal in said National HS School the petitioner appeared before the concerned School Selection Committee (SSC) of National HS School on 14.12.2016 but, finding that the said SSC was not in conformity with Rule 8 (4) of said 2003 Rules, she submitted a representation before the President of the SMDC of said school. Thereafter, on 21.12.2016, the petitioner submitted representation before the Principal of said school and on 26.12.2016, she filed a representation before the Commissioner and Secretary to the Government of Assam, Secondary Education Department, respondent No. 1, in that regard with a copy to the Director of Secondary Education, Assam, respondent No. 2.

7. It is submitted by the petitioner that the SSC constituted for selection of regular Principal in said HS School was not constituted as per the provisions of the Rule 8(4) of 2003 Rules and also the Notifications and Office Memorandum issued by the Secondary Education Department in that regard. It is further contended by the petitioner that there was no quorum in the said SSC when the interview was held on 14.12.2016, which consisted only the President of the SMDC, the Member Secretary and one Assistant Teacher of said HS school.

8. As the representation of the petitioner was not considered by the respondents in the Secondary Education Department, she preferred this writ petition with a prayer to set aside the panel of names recommended by the said SSC of National HS School in the interview held on 14.12.2016 for the post of regular Principal of said school and for a direction to hold a fresh interview with the same candidates who have ear

















Click Here to Read the rest of this document

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top