IMPORTANT POINT
The omission of a qualified teacher from the provincialization list is arbitrary and violates statutory provisions and principles of natural justice.

JUDGMENT

Heard Mr. D.S. Deka, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. P.N. Sharma, learned standing counsel, Education (Elementary) Department, appearing for the respondent Nos.1 and 2; Mr. P. Nayak, learned standing counsel for the respondent Nos.3—5 and Mr. S.C. Pandit, learned counsel for the respondent Nos.6 and 7.

2. In this petition, under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner, namely, Dharani Chandra Brahma has prayed for issuing direction to the respondent authorities to provincialize his service as tutor in the Bodofa Upendra Nath Brahma M.E. School, District-Baksa as per rules enacted by the Government of Assam and alternatively also prayed for issuing direction to the State respondents to dispose of the representation pending before the respondents by examining the matter related to this writ petition.

3. The background facts leading to filing of the present petition, is briefly stated as under:-

?The petitioner was appointed by the School Management Committee of Bodofa Upendra Nath Brahma M.E. School, which was provincialized on 04.02.2021. The petitioner was appointed in the said school by the School Management Committee, vide order dated 29.12.1992 (Annexure-'A') and the petitioner had joined on 01.01.1993 and submitted his joining report (Annexure-=B‘). The name of the petitioner finds mention in the DISE code of the said School for the year 2009 – 2010, as the 2 ^nd senior-most Assistant Teacher and prior to that the Block Elementary Education Officer, Tihu, Barama, had inspected the School on 27.08.1999 and prepared an inspection report (Annexure-'C'), wherein also the name of the petitioner finds mention as 2 ^nd senior-most Assistant Teacher of the School. Thereafter, a list was prepared for provincialization of the said School and its employees under the Assam Venture Educational Institutions (Provincialisation of Services) Act, 2011 (hereinafter referred to as the Act of 2011) by the District Scrutiny Committee and in the format prepared by the District Scrutiny Committee also the name of the petitioner appeared as 2 ^nd senior-most employee at Sl. No.46 and the DISE code of the School also find mention in the said report and the DISE Code No.0706102 and the list indicates that the petitioner was teaching in the said School w.e.f. 01.01.1993 and the copy of the format prepared by the District Scrutiny Committee is enclosed with the petition as Annexure-=D‘. Thereafter, another list was prepared for provincialization of the venture M.E. Schools under the said Act of 2011 and pursuant to the Act of 2011, the Government had issued the letter dated 15.09.2012 and there also his name was shown as the 2 ^nd senior-most Assistant Teacher and the said recommendation is enclosed with the petition as Annexure- =E‘. But, the services of the employees serving in the aforementioned school were not provincialized due to non-fulfillment of certain criteria. Thereafter, new Act i.e. The Assam Education (Provincialisation of Services of Teachers and Re-Organization of Educational Institutions) Act, 2017 (hereinafter referred to as the Act of 2017) of the Bodofa Upendra Nath Brahma M.E. School was provincialized on 04.02.2021 and the services of the employees were provincialized. However, the name of the petitioner, who was the 2 ^nd senior-most Assistant Teacher in the said M.E. School and who was teaching Social Science since the date of his joining on 01.01.1993, find no mention in the said provincialisation list and the said list is enclosed with the petition as Annexure -=F‘ and instead the name of respondent No.6 Shri Narad Chandra Brahma had appeared in the said provincialisation list at Sl. No.30, who was the 3 ^rd senior-most Assistant Teacher under the Act of 2011 and in the report of the District Scrutiny Committee, the name of the petitioner was shown as the 2 ^nd senior-m