IN THE HIGH COURT OF GAUHATI, ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH
R.M. CHHAYA, SOUMITRA SAIKIA, JJ.
Bhaben Bhatta, S/o. Late Prafulla Bhatta & Ors. - Petitioners
Versus
The State of Assam, Represented by the Commissioner and Secretary to the Govt. of Assam, Education (Secondary) Department & Ors. - Respondents
WP(C) No. 4829 of 2021
Decided On : 22-12-2022
Assam Secondary Education (Provincialised Schools) Service Rules, 2018 - Rule-14(1), (2)(b), (1)(b)(i), (ii), 16(2) - Assam Secondary Education (Provincialisation) Service Rules, 2003 - Constitution of India, 1950 - Article 14 and 16 - Selection process for post - Seniority - Clubbing of two distinct cadres will unreasonably affect chances of petitioners from promotion during selection process for post of Headmaster - Petitioners further urged that, the selection to the post of Headmaster was made on basis of school wise seniority - Held, Any Rule or provision of Statute cannot be casually declared to be constitutionally invalid - Any Rule or Statute to be declared to be constitutionally invalid must offend any fundamental right, or must be in conflict with any law which is an existence prior to incorporation of such a Rule or Statute or that authority who had incorporated Rule or Statute was not empowered to do so - Petitioners have failed to demonstrate that ratio laid down in Kripa Sindhu Das (supra) is also not applicable to Rules of 2018 in view of fact that seniority of candidates is to be determined district wise as opposed to school wise seniority under erstwhile Rules of 2003 - Under such circumstances, Court is unable to accept contentions raised by petitioner that ratio of Co-ordinate Bench rendered in Kripa Sindhu Das (supra) and followed in Protiva Devi (supra) is not applicable to facts of present case - Rather, Court find that notwithstanding change brought in by Rules of 2018 in respect of district wise seniority, ratio laid down in Kripa Sindhu Das (supra) and followed in Protiva Devi (supra) is squarely applicable to facts of present proceedings - Petition dismissed.
JUDGMENT :
Soumitra Saikia, J.
1. Heard Mr. I.H. Saikia, learned counsel for the petitioners. Also heard Mr. R. Mazumdar, learned standing counsel, Education (Secondary) Department, appearing for the respondent Nos. 1, 2, 3 & 5.
2. This writ petition has been filed by three writ petitioners jointly challenging the constitutional vires of Rule-14(1) and the First Proviso to Rule-14(2)(b) of the Assam Secondary Education (Provincialised Schools) Service Rules, 2018. The three petitioners were appointed as Graduate Teachers by orders dated 15.09.1998, 22.10.1998 and 15.10.1998 respectively in P.B. Lahkarpara High School, Lahkarapara; Janta High School, Rampur and Kaithalkuchi High School, Kaithalkuchi respectively. The appointment orders were issued by the Inspector of Schools, Nalbari district Circle, Nalbari. In the course of their services, the three petitioners upon being eligible to apply for the selection to the post of Assistant Headmaster in their respective schools participated in the selection process and by orders dated 05.08.2017, 03.02.2012 & 05.08.2017, respectively, the three petitioners were promoted to the post of Assistant Headmasters in their respective schools by the Director, Secondary Education, Assam. Upon being so promoted, they joined in their substantive post of Assistant Headmaster on promotion in their respective schools. They continued to render their services to the satisfaction of all concerned. Subsequently, upon retirement of the regular headmasters in their respective schools, the petitioner No. 2 was allowed to hold charge of Headmaster of Janta High School, Rampur vide order dated 25.07.2019 and the petitioner No. 3 was also permitted to hold charge of Kaithalkuchi High School, Kaithalkuchi vide order dated 01.03.2019 issued by the Director.
3. The Assam Secondary Education (Provincialised Schools) Service Rules, 2018 (hereinafter referred to Rules of 2018) came to be notified in the Official Gazette on 18.09.2019 and thereby the Assam Secondary Education (Provincialisation) Service Rules, 2003 came to be repealed. The services of the employees of Provincialised Secondary Schools are encadred in terms of Rule 3 of the Rules of 2018. The post of Assistant Headmasters and Graduate Teacher are encadred under Rule-3(1)(b)(i) and Rule-3(1)(b)(ii) of the said Rules of 2018. The procedure for filling up of the posts of Headmaster is prescribed under Rule-14 of the Rules of 2018. Under Rule 14(1), the posts of Headmaster should be filled up by promotion from the candidates amongst Graduate Teachers as per district wise seniority list on the recommendation of the District Selection Committee constituted under Rule-16(2). The selection of Headmaster will be based on seniority and satisfactory Annual Confidence Report for the last three consecutive years as per the procedure provided under Sub-Rule 3. The proviso to Rule 14(1) further prescribes that the seniority of the Graduate Teachers shall be determined from the date of receiving graduate scale of pay by respective Assistant Teacher. Similarly, the proviso to Rule 14(2)(b) prescribes that the Graduate Teacher shall include the cadre of Assistant Headmaster for the purposes of selection to the post of Headmaster and the seniority of the Assistant Headmaster shall be counted from the date of joining as a Graduate Teacher with a Graduate Scale of Pay.
4. The primary grievance of the petitioners is that the Rule 14(2)(b) has included the cadre of Assistant Headmaster within the cadre of Graduate Teacher for the purpose of selection and promotion to the post of Headmaster and further the seniority of the Assistant Headmaster is to be counted from the date of joining as a Graduate Teacher with Graduate Scale of Pay. According to the petitioners, since they are all regularly promoted and are rendering services in their substantive posts as Assistant Headmasters in their respective schools, and the post of Assistant Headmaster being shown as a separate cadre unde
U.P. Power Corporation Limited Vs. Ayodhya Pd. Mishra & Anr.
Point of Law : Rule 14(2) prescribes promotion to the posts of Headmaster/Headmistress and Superintendent from the school-wise seniority list on recommendation by the State Selection Board and that t....
The main legal point established in the judgment is the requirement for the respondent authorities to follow the regular appointment process as mandated by the Assam Secondary Education (Provincialis....
The main legal point established is that eligibility for participation in a selection process is determined at the time of initiation of the process, and subsequent eligibility does not entitle a can....
The appointment of public officials must adhere to the prescribed procedures and consider all eligible candidates, as per the relevant service rules.
The omission of B.Ed. qualification for Vice-Principal recruitment violates NCTE guidelines, necessitating its inclusion as a mandatory requirement.
Completion of 7 years of service in the pay scale of Headmaster is the requirement for getting the first grade pay for Headmasters of Aided Complete Secondary Schools, as per the interpretation of Ke....
The court established that the right to promotion is determined by the rules in force at the time of consideration, and the Service Rules of 2020 do not permit promotion from Grade-IV to Junior Assis....
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.