JUDGMENT :

Heard Mr. M. Khan, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. P. K. Borah, learned Standing Counsel for the Elementary Education Department representing the respondents no. 1, 2, 4, & 6 and Mr. S. Borah, learned Standing Counsel for the SSA representing the respondent no. 3 as well as Mr. P. Saikia, learned counsel for the respondent no. 5.

2. The petitioner, by way of instituting the present proceeding has presented a challenge to an order dated 11.01.2022, issued by the Director of Elementary Education, Assam, rejecting the case of the petitioner for provincialisation of her services under the provisions of the Assam Venture Educational Institutions (Provincialisation of Services) Act, 2011 as amended in 2012, on the ground that the petitioner herein did not have the requisite qualifications at the time of her initial appointment in the venture school.

3. As projected in the writ petition, the petitioner was appointed as an Assistant Teacher of Dalal Shah L.P. School, Karimganj, on 04.02.2008 by its School Managing Committee. The petitioner joined her services on the same date. It is to be noted that at the time when the petitioner was so appointed in the school, the school was in its venture stage. Thereafter, on enactment of the said Act of 2011, the case of the petitioner and the incumbent in the post of Headmaster in the school were taken up for consideration for provincialisation of their services. On conclusion of the process so involved, the Director of Elementary Education, Assam vide an order dated 14.05.2013, proceeded to provincialise the services of the teachers found eligible in venture schools under the jurisdiction of the District Elementary Education Officer (DEEO), Karimganj. Insofar as the school of the petitioner is concerned, in the said order, only the services of the incumbent in the post of Headmaster came to be provincialized and the name of the petitioner was dropped from the purview of the provincialisation of her services. The post of Assistant Teacher in the said school was denoted to be vacant in the said order dated 14.05.2013.

4. The petitioner being aggrieved for being left out from the purview of provincialisation exercise as undertaken and in not being considered for provincialisation of her services, approached this Court by way of instituting a writ petition being WP(C) No. 4680/2021 and this Court, vide order dated 10.11.2021 on consideration of the issues arising therein, disposed of the said writ petition by holding that a legal right exists in favor of the petitioner for being now considered under the provisions of the Assam Education (Provincialisation of Services of Teachers and Re-Organisation Institutions) Act, 2017 and accordingly, the petitioner was directed to submit a representation before the Director of Elementary Education, Assam and the said representation was directed to be considered and disposed of by way of passing a reasoned order by taking note of the provisions of Section 3(1)(x) of the said Act of 2017. The petitioner, accordingly, submitted her representation in the matter in terms of the direction as passed by this Court and the said representation on being considered, came to be rejected vide the order dated 11.01.2022, holding that the claim of the petitioner for provincialisation of her services in the said school cannot be accepted under the said Act of 2011. Being aggrieved, the petitioner has instituted the present proceeding.

5. It is to be noted that this Court, vide the order dated 10.11.2021 had specifically directed the Director of Elementary Education, Assam, to consider the case of the petitioner under the provisions of the said Act of 2017, however, on a perusal of the order dated 11.01.2022, such consideration is seen to not have been extended to the petitioner and her case was again considered under provisions of the repealed Act of 2011, on the ground that the petitioner at the time of her initial appointment in the school did n