Seniority of teachers is determined from when they officially qualify as Graduate Teachers; retrospective regularization does not grant earlier seniority.

JUDGMENT :

M. Zothankhuma, J.

Heard Mr. P. Mahanta, learned counsel for the appellant. Also heard Mr. R.P. Sharma, learned Sr. Counsel for the respondent No.1 assisted by Ms. A. Deka and Ms. R. Baruah, learned counsel for the respondent Nos.2 & 3. Ms. B. Bhuyan, learned Standing Counsel, BTC appears for respondent Nos.4 & 5. No one appears for the respondent No.6, even though notice had been served through dasti service.

2. The issue to be decided is whether the appellant or the respondent No.1 should be made the In-charge Principal of Barghuli Nehru Higher Secondary School. The learned Single Judge, vide the impugned judgment and order dated 16.05.2024 passed in WP(C) 2809/2022, directed that the respondent No.1 should be made the In-charge Principal of the said school, in view of the fact that the respondent No.1 joined as a Senior Hindi Teacher on being appointed on 29.04.1994 in the Graduate Scale of Pay. On the other hand, the appellant had been substantively appointed as an Assistant Graduate Teacher on 06.05.1996.

3. The learned counsel for the appellant submits that prior to the respondent No.1 joining the Barghuli Nehru Higher Secondary School on 28.10.1998 on the basis of the appointment order dated 23.10.1998, the respondent No.1 initially joined another school on the basis of the appointment order dated 29.04.1994 as a Senior Hindi Teacher with Graduate Scale of Pay on ad hoc basis.

4. The respondent No.1 became a Graduate in Arts only on 27.09.1997. On the other hand, the appellant was substantively appointed as a Graduate Teacher of Barghuli Nehru Higher Secondary School on 06.05.1996. As the appellant was a Graduate Teacher prior to the respondent No.1 becoming a Graduate Teacher, the appellant had to be treated to be the more senior teacher out of the two. He also submits that though order dated 08.02.2007 had been issued by the respondent authorities, regularizing the services of the respondent No.1 w.e.f. the date of his joining the Barghuli Nehru Higher Secondary School, i.e., on 28.10.1998 and thereafter, w.e.f. 29.04.1994 vide Corrigendum dated 19.04.2022, the said regularization cannot be used for the purpose of seniority and can at best be considered for pension only.

5. The learned counsel for the appellant further submits that the Proviso to Rule 14 of the Assam Secondary Education (Provincialised Schools) Rules 2018 (in short “the Rules”) had been wrongly applied by the learned Single Judge, in determining the seniority of the respondent No.1 over the appellant, inasmuch as, seniority in terms of the Proviso to Rule 14 of the Rules can be counted only from the date when 2 conditions are fulfilled. Firstly, the Teacher/Assistant Teacher has to have a Graduate Degree in terms of Rule 2(i) of the Rules, coupled with the fact that the Teacher/Assistant Teacher receives the Graduate Scale of Pay. The respondent No.1 being a Graduate only w.e.f. 27.09.1997, the seniority of the respondent No.1 as a Graduate Teacher can be counted only from 27.09.1997. He submits that the respondent No.1 was not a Graduate Teacher as per the Rules prior to 27.09.1997. He accordingly submits that the impugned judgment and order should be set aside, as the seniority of the respondent No.1 as a Graduate Teacher has been counted before he was borne into the cadre of Graduate Teachers.

6. Mr. R.P. Sharma, learned Sr. Counsel for the respondent No.1, on the other hand, submits that as per Rule 3(i)(a) of the Rules, the teaching staff in provincialized schools consist of various classes and Class-II states that it shall include the following cadres:-

(i) Vice Principal;

(ii) Post Graduate Teacher; and

(iii) Headmaster/Superintendent

7. The learned Sr. Counsel for the respondent No.1 submits that while both the appellant and respondent No.1 are Post Graduate Teachers, the post of Vice Principal has been placed above the post of Post Graduate Teacher in Class-II. As the respondent No.1 had been holding the post of Vice Principal of the said sch