The petitioner's entitlement to provincialisation of services was determined based on the procedural requirements and eligibility criteria outlined in the relevant Acts.

Heard Mr. I.H. Saikia, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. A.R. Tahbildar, learned Standing Counsel, Education (Higher) Department, appearing for the respondent Nos.1, 2 & 3 and Mr. B. Deori, learned Junior Government Advocate, Assam, appearing for the respondent No.4.

2. The petitioner, by way of instituting the present proceedings, has raised a grievance with regard to non-consideration of his case for provincialisation of his services as a Librarian in Jaleswar College, Tapobon. The petitioner claims that his services are required to be directed to be provincialised w.e.f. 01.01.2013 in terms of the provisions of the Assam Venture Educational Institutions (Provincialisation of Services) Act, 2011 (hereinafter referred to as “Act of 2011”).

3. The petitioner herein contends that he possesses the requisite qualifications for appointment against the post of Librarian in a College of the State of Assam. Accordingly, noticing the qualifications possessed by the petitioner, the Managing Committee of Jaleswar College, Tapobon, vide an order dated 24.01.1999, appointed the petitioner as the Librarian in the said College. The petitioner joined his services in the said College in terms of the appointment so made in his case w.e.f. 07.02.1999 and he is working therein as on date. It is to be noted that at the time of appointment of the petitioner in the said College, the College was in its venture stage.

4. As projected in the writ petition, on the enactment of the provisions of the said Act of 2011, the cases of the eligible teaching and non-teaching staff of the College in question was placed before the jurisdictional District Scrutiny Committee as constituted in the matter for verification of their service particulars and making recommendation in their case for provincialisation of their services. It is contended that the jurisdictional District Scrutiny Committee, on consideration of the case of the petitioner, had recommended his case for provincialisation of his services. However, when the final list of teachers eligible for provincialisation was so published, the name of the petitioner was shown therein with the remark “under qualified”. The petitioner thereafter preferred a representation on 25.03.2013 for inclusion of his name in the list of eligible teachers, however, the same was not considered.

5. The services of the eligible teaching and non-teaching staff of the said College came to be provincialised vide an order dated 20.01.2014 w.e.f. 01.01.2013. The case of the petitioner not having been provincialised, he repeatedly approached the respondent authorities for reconsideration of his case and for provincialisation of his services w.e.f. 01.01.2013 in the manner the other teaching and non-teaching staff of the said College were so provincialised. However, in view of the fact that the said Act of 2011 was held to be ultra vires by this Court and set aside vide the judgment & order dated 23.09.2016 passed in WP(C) No.5825/2012, further processing of the case of the petitioner under the provisions of the said Act of 2011 could not be taken forward. It is contended by the petitioner that upon enactment of the provisions of the Assam Education (Provincialisation of Services of Teachers and Re-organisation of Educational Institutions) Act, 2017 (hereinafter referred to as “Act of 2017”), he submitted representations before the authorities for consideration of his case. However, the consideration as required to be made in his case not having been so made, the present proceedings have been instituted by the petitioner.

6. It is to be noticed that with regard to provincialisation of the services of non-teaching staff of venture educational institutions, the authorities had enacted the Assam Education (Provincialisation of Services of Non-Teaching Staff of Venture Educational Institutions) Act, 2018 (hereinafter referred to as “Act of 2018”) and the post of Librarian having been included within the purview of the said A