The main legal point established in the judgment is the validity of the petitioner's B.Ed. Degree, the determination of seniority for promotion, and the illegal deprivation of fair consideration for promotion, leading to the direction for reconsideration of the petitioner's case by the State Selection Board.

JUDGMENT :

N. UNNI KRISHNAN NAIR, J.

1. Heard Mr. P.P. Dutta, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. U. Sharma, learned standing counsel, Education (Secondary) Department, representing the respondent Nos. 1, 2 & 3; Mr. M. Nath, learned senior counsel, assisted by Mr. D.P. Bora, learned counsel representing the respondent No. 4 and Mr. P.J. Phukan, learned standing counsel, Gauhati University, representing the respondent No. 5.

2. The petitioner, by way of instituting the present proceeding, has put to challenge an order dated 09.12.2019, by which the respondent No. 4 was promoted as Headmaster of Dumunichowki Girls’ High School, Darrang. The said order was issued by the Director of Secondary Education, Assam in pursuance to a process of selection.

3. The facts requisite for the purpose of adjudication of the issues arising in the present proceeding are noted herein-below:

The petitioner was appointed as an Assistant Teacher in the intermediate scale of pay in Dumunichowki Girls’ High School, Darrang on 28.09.1988. Thereafter, he was authorized the graduate scale of pay w.e.f. 1.12.1993. The respondent No. 4 was also appointed as an Assistant Teacher in the same School in the intermediate scale of pay on 20.03.1992 and he was also authorized the graduate sale of pay of w.e.f. 01.12.1993. The petitioner had, with permission from the Inspector of Schools, Darrang District Circle, Mangaldoi as well as the Headmaster of the said School, proceeded to pursue his B.Ed. Course in Sipajhar B.Ed. College and on completion of the said Course, the petitioner was conferred with the B.Ed. Degree by the Gauhati University in the year 1995.

On a vacancy arising in the post of Headmaster of the said School w.e.f. 31.01.2018, the petitioner was allowed to hold the charge of the said post of Headmaster by the Director of Secondary Education, Assam, vide order dated 17.12.2018. Thereafter, the cases of the petitioner as well as the respondent No. 4 herein were considered for the purpose of promotion to the said vacant post of Headmaster available in the School in question. On conclusion of the process of selection, the respondent No. 4 was appointed as the Headmaster of the said School in question by the Director of Secondary Education, Assam, vide order dated 09.12.2019. Being aggrieved, the petitioner had instituted the present proceeding.

4. Mr. Dutta, learned counsel for the petitioner, by referring to the provisions of Rule 14 of the Assam Secondary Education (Provincialised) Service Rules, 2003 (for short “2003 Rules”), submits that the promotion to the post of Headmaster is to be effected basing on the seniority of the candidates in the School and satisfactory ACRs for 3(three) years. Mr. Dutta, by referring to a list available in the writ proceeding showing the seniority of teachers, has contended that the petitioner had joined the School on 16.05.1989, while the respondent No. 4 had so joined on 20.03.1992. Both the petitioner and the respondent No. 4 were initially appointed in the intermediate scale of pay and were thereafter authorized the graduate scale of pay w.e.f. 01.12.1993. It is the contention of Mr. Dutta that even if the date of receipt of graduate scale in respect of both the petitioner as well as the respondent No. 4 is held to be same and the services under the intermediate scale of pay is not considered, their inter-se seniority is to be determined by reckoning their respective dates of birth.

5. Referring to the date of births, as reflected in the said seniority list, Mr. Dutta submits that the petitioner, who was born on 01.01.1963, is senior to the respondent No. 4, who was born on 01.03.1967. Mr. Dutta submits that although the respondents had not disclosed to the petitioner reasons as to why he was deprived of the promotion in question, but by referring to the affidavit filed by the Director of Secondary Education, Assam in the present proceedings, Mr. Dutta has contended that the reasons are stated therein. The r