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

2021 Supreme(Gau) 363

ACHINTYA MALLA BUJOR BARUA
Shika Rudra Paul D/o Hrishi Mohan Rudra Paul – Appellant
Versus
State of Assam, Rep. by the Principal Secretary – Respondent


Advocates:
Advocate Appeared:
For the Petitioner: Mr. M. Khan.

JUDGMENT :

ACHINTYA MALLA BUJOR BARUA, J.

1. Heard Mr. M. Khan, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. B. Kaushik, learned counsel for the respondents No. 1, 2 and 4 being the authorities under the Elementary Education Department of the Govt. of Assam, Mr. S.R. Barua, learned counsel for the respondent No. 3 being the District Scrutiny Committee represented by the Deputy Commissioner, Karimganj.

2. The petitioner was appointed as an Assistant Teacher in the Agardighir Par L.P. School and she has been working as such since 01.11.2008. When the claim of the petitioner was examined for provincialisation of her service under the Assam Venture Educational Institutions (Provincialisation of Services) Act, 2011 (in short Act of 2011), it did not materialize in an order in her favour inasmuch as, the respondent found that she was not adequately qualified for the post. Although Mr. M. Khan, learned counsel refers to certain communications from the Director of Elementary Education, Assam to the Commissioner & Secretary to the Govt. of Assam dated 21.05.2015 providing for a list of 14 teachers who could not be provincialised, but we are of the view that the said document will not lea

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
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top