Back
IN THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)
KARDAK ETE, J.
Mina Goswami W/o-Sri Prasanta Sarma – Appellant
Versus
The State Of Assam And Ors – Respondents
WP(C) 202 of 2022, WP(C) 712 of 2022
Decided on : 22-02-2024
Appointment - In-charge Headmaster/Headmistress - Assam Secondary Education (Provincialised) Service Rules, 2003 - Rule 14, 15, 24
Fact of the Case:
The case involved the appointment of In-charge Headmaster/Headmistress of Amtola High School, Lakhimpur under FR-49(C) on a purely temporary arrangement. The dispute arose when the respondent No.4 claimed the appointment of Headmaster be strictly on seniority basis, as she had obtained the B.Ed degree after the appointment of the petitioner as Headmaster In-Charge.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that both the orders allowing the petitioner and respondent No.4 to hold the position of Headmaster In-Charge were not per se illegal. However, the court directed the respondent authorities to complete the process of appointment of Headmaster/Headmistress on a regular basis as mandated by the Service Rule 2003.
Issues: The issues involved the eligibility and qualification requirements for the appointment of Headmaster/Headmistress, the legality of the orders allowing temporary appointments, and the process of appointment on a regular basis as per the Service Rule 2003.
Ratio Decidendi: The court held that the orders allowing temporary appointments were not per se illegal, but emphasized the need for the respondent authorities to follow the regular appointment process as mandated by the Service Rule 2003.
Final Decision: The court disposed of both writ petitions with a direction to the respondent authorities to complete the process of appointment of Headmaster/Headmistress on a regular basis, preferably within four months, and allowed the petitioners to hold the charge of Headmaster In-charge until the regular appointment is completed.
JUDGMENT :
Heard Ms. B. Choudhury, learned counsel for the petitioner in WP(C) 202/2022 and for the respondent No.6 in WP(C) 712/2022. Also heard Mr. P.J. Saikia, learned counsel for the petitioner in WP(C) 712/2022 and for the respondent No.4 in WP(C) 202/2022 and Mr. U. Sarma, learned standing counsel, Secondary Education Department.
2. Issue involved in both the writ petitions pertains to appointment of In-charge Headmaster/Headmistress of Amtola High School, Lakhimpur under FR-49(C) on purely temporary arrangement.
3. The writ petitioner in WP(C) 202/2022, namely Sri Dambaru Das was appointed as an Assistant Teacher and joined his service on 25.12.2000 at Amtola High School, Lakhimpur. The school was provincialised in the year 2013 and the service of the petitioner and respondent No.4 namely Smti Mina Goswami and other staff of the school were provincialised on 20.08.2013 w.e.f. 01.01.2013. The petitioner was deputed to undergo B.Ed course and he completed his B.E.d course on 29.09.2020. Vide dated 24.08.2021, the then Headmaster of the school submitted seniority list of the Amtola High School before the respondent No.3, wherein, the name of the petitioner appeared at Serial No.7 having B.Ed degree and the name of the respondent No.4 appeared at Serial No.5, who did not have the B.Ed degree as on 24.08.2021. The Director of Secondary Education, Assam vide order No.GB-EST/Apptt/FP/22/2016/150 dated 09.09.2021 allowed the petitioner to hold the charge of Headmaster In-Charge of Amtola High School, Lakhimpur along with financial power to draw and disburse the salary etc., of the staff of the said school in addition to his normal duty as an Assistant Teacher under FR-49(C) vice Sri Paramananda Das, Headmaster, on his retirement on 30.09.2021. It provides that the order is purely temporary arrangement and will come into force w.e.f. 01.10.2021. Thereafter, on the retirement of Sri Paramananda Das on attaining the age of superannuation, he was released from the government service w.e.f. 30.09.2021. Accordingly, in terms of the order dated 09.09.2021, the petitioner joined his service as Headmaster In-Charge on 30.09.2021.
4. While the petitioner was serving as Headmaster In-Charge of the said school, on 20.09.2021 the respondent No.4 submitted an application before the respondent No.3 stating that she had completed her graduation in 1995, Master degree in 2017 and B.Ed on 10.09.2021, thereby, claiming that the appointment of Headmaster be strictly on seniority basis, who has the B.Ed degree. According to the respondent No.4, the petitioner is junior to her despite having the B.Ed degree and the respondent No.4 has better claim than the petitioner. The respondent No.3 directed the then Headmaster of the school to look into the matter pursuant to which, the then Headmaster has informed the respondent No.3 that at the time of submission of seniority list dated 24.08.2021 the respondent No.4 did not have the B.Ed degree although by now she has obtained the B.Ed degree.
5. The respondent No.2 vide order No.GB-EST/Apptt/FP/22/2016/178 dated 03.01.2022 allowed the respondent No.4 to hold the charge of Headmistress In-charge of Amtola High School, Lakhimpur with all financial power to draw and disburse the salary etc., of the staff of the said school in addition to her normal duty as an Assistant Teacher under FR-49(C) vice the petitioner Sri Dambaru Das by way of temporary arrangement. Being aggrieved by the impugned order dated 03.01.2022, the petitioner has filed the instant writ petition WP(C) 202/2022.
6. Ms. B. Choudhury, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner was allowed to hold the charge of Headmaster In-Charge vide order dated 09.09.2021 as he was having B.Ed degree which is the requirement under Rule 14 of the Assam Secondary Education (Provincialised) Service Rules, 2003 (in short, ‘Service Rules 2003’). In the seniority list, the name of the petitioner appeared at Serial No.7 and the respondent No.4 appear
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 appointment of public officials must adhere to the prescribed procedures and consider all eligible candidates, as per the relevant service rules.
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 court established that for determining seniority post-provincialization, the date of birth is the determinable factor when prior service in a venture school is not considered.
The main legal point established in the judgment is that the fulfillment of eligibility criteria for appointment as Principal under the Rules of 2020 is crucial, and the authorities must adhere to th....
The regular incumbency of a candidate may exempt them from certain eligibility requirements for a position.
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
