A.K. Goswami, J.

Heard Mr. M. Sarma, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner in WP(C) No.2632/2014; Mr. B. Purkayastha, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner in WP(C) No.4147/2015 and petitioners in WP(C) No.6261/2017 as well as Mr. H. Baruah, learned counsel appearing for the petitioners in WP(C) 4706/2016. We have also heard Mr. D. Mazumdar, learned Additional Advocate General, Assam, assisted by Ms. P. Chakraborty, learned standing counsel, Secondary Education Department, Government of Assam and Mr. S.K. Das, learned counsel appearing for the respondent No. 5 in WP(C) No.4147/2015.

2. By these writ petitions the petitioners essentially call into question Rule 12(2)(iii) of the Assam Secondary Education (Provincialisation) Service Rules, 2003 (for short, “2003 Rules”). For the purpose of appreciation of the controversy raised, we will, primarily, refer to the pleadings in WP(C) No.2632/2014. The petitioner therein passed M.A. examination in the year 2012 and he had obtained B.Ed. degree in the year 1992. He was appointed as an Assistant Graduate Teacher of Dakshin Borbhag Girls High School, Nalbari, and he had joined in the said post on 05.06.1992. He was transferred by an order dated 02.08.2004 from Dakshin Borbhag Girls High School to Karia Higher Secondary School in public interest vice one Shri Kulesh Chandra Deka working in Karia Higher Secondary School transferred to Dakshin Borbhag Girls High School. The petitioner being the senior most Assistant Teacher of Karia Higher Secondary School was given the charge of Principal of Karia Higher Secondary School on the retirement of the incumbent Principal on 31.05.2013 by an order dated 01.07.2013. The said order dated 01.07.2013 came to be challenged before this Court by the respondent No.7 in a writ petition registered as WP(C) No.3765/2013. During the pendency of the said writ petition, by an order dated 26.07.2013 issued by the Director of Secondary Education, the order dated 01.07.2013 was withdrawn and the Inspector of Schools, Nalbari District Circle was allowed to hold the charge of Principal with financial power. The petitioner challenged the said order by filing a writ petition registered and numbered as WP(C) No.4402/2013. However, the order dated 26.07.2013 came to be withdrawn as a result of which the petitioner had withdrawn WP(C) No.4402/2013 on 08.08.2013.

3. Vide judgment and order dated 09.05.2014, WP(C) 3765/2013 was allowed setting aside and quashing the order dated 01.07.2013 in terms of the order dated 18.11.2009 passed in WA No.281/2009 (Sushen Chandra Das Vs. Prafulla Kr. Das and others) with a further direction to the Director of Secondary Education, Assam, to take steps for appointment of an i/c, Principal and it was also directed that till such time the exercise was carried out, the Inspector of Schools, Nalbari District Circle, would discharge the duties and responsibilities of i/c, Principal. While disposing of WA 281/2009, a Division Bench of this Court had noted that Rule 12(d), which has since been replaced by the present Rule 12, prescribed that a graduate teacher from any other school except a Higher Secondary school is ineligible for appointment to the post of Principal. It was also held that the rules for direct recruitment, particularly, with regard to eligibility, should be followed while making officiating appointment for i/c Principal. In this background, the writ petition was filed by the petitioner challenging the validity of Rule 12(2)(iii) of the 2003 Rules on the premise that Rule 12(2)(iii), which altogether excludes a graduate teacher teaching in a High School from being eligible for recruitment as Principal in Higher Secondary and Higher Secondary and Multipurpose School, is arbitrary and discriminatory.

4. Though the petitioner in WP(C) 2632/2014 was teaching in a Higher Secondary School, he did not fulfil the eligibility criteria of 17 years of teaching experience in a Higher Secondary School. As his teaching