JUDGMENT :

1. Heard Mrs. R. Devi, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. K. Gogoi, learned standing counsel for the Higher Education Department and Mr. G. Pegu, learned counsel for the respondent No. 5 being the Deputy Commissioner, Goalpara.

2. The petitioner Samsul Alam describes himself as a social worker and a person of repute and initiates this proceeding for issuing a writ in the nature of quo warranto for removing the respondent No. 6 Abdul Wahab Miah from the post of in-charge Principal of West Goalpara College, Goalpara on the ground that the petitioner had earlier lodged a complaint against the respondent No. 6 that his qualifications are doubtful and that he was involved in certain financial irregularities. The petitioner refers to the complaint lodged by him dated 13.7.2020 addressed to the Minister of Higher Education Assam. As per the complaint lodged by the petitioner, the respondent No. 6 was appointed as a Tutor in the subject Education at West Goalpara College in the year 1991 and that when the West Guwahati College was brought under the deficit system in the year 1996 the post of the respondent No. 6 was initially not approved by the Director of Higher Education, Assam, but subsequently approved with a condition that the respondent No. 6 Abdul Wahab Miah to obtain his MA degree in Education. Accordingly, the respondent No. 6 obtained his MA degree in Education from the Aligarh Muslim University which is located outside the State of Assam. In the circumstance, the petitioner raised the allegation that the respondent No. 6 had not taken any leave from the competent authority for undertaking the MA degree nor he could produce any migration certificate from the Gauhati University, which according to the petitioner is a mandatory requirement for pursuing a degree from outside the State. The petitioner also seeks to raise certain allegations in his complaint that the respondent No. 6 had withdrawn a large amount of money in the name of printing and publishing the prospectus of the college, whereas on the other hand, no such prospectus was published. Apart from the above, certain other allegations were also raised by the petitioner in his complaint dated 13.7.2020. We have also taken note that the respondent No. 6 was subsequently made the in-charge Principal of the West Goalpara College.

3. On being asked, the petitioner has stated that while the respondent No. 6 was continuing as a lecturer in the college, no such grievance against the manner in which the respondent No. 6 had obtained his MA degree was raised by the petitioner. In the circumstance we are to understand that the grievance of the petitioner against the respondent No. 6 had arisen only when he was made the in-charge Principal of the college concerned. The said aspect will have its relevance as the subject-matter of the complaint of the petitioner that the respondent No. 6 had obtained his MA degree without taking leave from the departmental authorities would also have been equally relevant to assail the holding of the post of lecturer by the respondent No. 6. Secondly, the only allegation regarding his postgraduate qualification is that the respondent No. 6 had done his MA degree from a University outside the State without obtaining any leave from the competent authority and also could not even produce his migration certificate.

4. The petitioner also refers to an enquiry report dated 11.2.2021 submitted by the Additional Deputy Commissioner, Goalpara, the Finance and Accounts Officer, Goalpara and the Assistant Commissioner, Goalpara which was conducted pursuant to the complaint filed by the petitioner. The penultimate paragraph of the said report dated 11.2.2021 is relied upon to be the basis of this writ petition to raise the submission that the petitioner could not produce any migration certificate that may have been issued in his favour.

5. On the aforesaid background of facts, this writ petition is instituted for a writ in the nature of