Misconduct in obtaining an educational degree does not invalidate the degree itself, but ongoing disciplinary proceedings prevent promotion to higher positions.

JUDGMENT :

M. Zothankhuma, J.

1. Heard Mr. N.J. Khataniar, learned counsel for the appellant (State). Also heard Mr. B. Purkayastha, learned counsel for the respondent no.1.

2. The case pertains to the appointment of In-charge Head Master of Gotanagar High School following the retirement of the earlier Head Master on 31/07/2024. The respondent no.1 (writ petitioner) has been serving as a Graduate Teacher since 1990 and was granted the graduate scale of pay from 19/11/1991.

3. When the Inspector of Schools submitted a proposal for placing an In-charge Head Master, the respondent no.1’s name appeared at Sl. No.1 in the seniority list. However, a complication arose because the petitioner had obtained his B.Ed degree in 2016, without taking prior permission from the appointing authority i.e. the Inspector of Schools, thereby contravening the provisions of Rule 13 of the Assam Services (Conduct) Rules, 1965 (herein after referred to as 1965 Rules). Due to the above, the respondent authorities ignored the claim of the respondent no. 1, who was the senior most Assistant Teacher and instead appointed the respondent no.2 as In-charge Head Master. Being aggrieved, the respondent no.1 filed WP(C) 3929/2024.

4. The case of the respondent no.1 was that Rule 13 of the 1965 Rules stood relaxed by Office Memorandum No. ASE.383/2011/Pt/77 dated 28/07/2014, which allowed teachers of High Schools to pursue and acquire B.Ed degree, by giving prior intimation to the Head of the Institution and the Inspector of Schools. Further, vide OM dated 22/11/2019 issued by the Department of School Education (Secondary Education Department, Government of Assam), B.Ed. degrees which had been obtained through on-line/distance education mode from IGNOU, KKHOU, IDOL etc. were held to be valid for recruitment and promotion. Thus, the B.Ed degree of the respondent no.1 could not be ignored.

5. The case of the appellant (State), on the other hand, was that the respondent no.1 had committed a misconduct under Rule 13 of the 1965 Rules and he had obtained the B.Ed. degree without prior permission of the appointing authority. As such, he could not be given the post of In- charge Head Master. Further, as the post of In-charge Head Master was an adhoc appointment, the respondent no.1 could not claim the post as a matter of right.

6. The learned Single Judge, by relying upon the judgment of this Court in the case of Tankeswar Nath Vs. State of Assam and others [(WP(C) 5419/2023], held that while obtaining a degree without permission may be misconduct, it does not invalidate the degree. Since the petitioner was the senior most Assistant Teacher and otherwise qualified, the learned Single Judge upheld the claim of the writ petitioner for holding the post of In-charge Head Master.

7. The learned counsel for the appellant submits that the impugned judgement should be set aside, in view of the fact that there is a disciplinary proceeding that has been initiated against the respondent no.1 and show cause notice had been issued to him, which has been replied to by the respondent no.1 by submitting his written statement of defence. He submits that as the disciplinary proceeding is pending, allowing the respondent no.1 to hold the charge of Head Master may prejudice the inquiry, as records may be manipulated and witnesses can be influenced. He also submits that when no permission has been granted under Rule 13 of the 1965 Rules by the appointing authority for obtaining B.Ed. degree, the said Rules would have to be followed in letter and spirit. Any Office Memorandum issued in violation of the Rules would have to be considered to be a nullity, as a Office Memorandum cannot override the Rules.

8. The learne