THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)
ROBIN PHUKAN, J.
Lovely Das, W/o - Sri Dilip Roy – Petitioner
Versus
The State Of Assam Represented By The Secretary To The Govt. Of Assam, Department Of Education (Elementary) And Ors. – Respondents
WP(C)/1573 OF 2023
Decided On : 30-04-2026
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. factual history regarding teacher appointment and service disputes. (Para 1 , 2 , 3 , 5 , 6 , 7) |
| 2. parties' contentions concerning validity of appointment and entitlement to salary. (Para 4 , 8 , 9) |
| 3. evaluation of evidence establishing the legality of the petitioner's selection. (Para 10 , 11 , 12 , 13) |
| 4. principle of quantum meruit for work performed and right to salary. (Para 14 , 15) |
| 5. mandamus direction for regularization and payment of arrears. (Para 16 , 17 , 18 , 19) |
JUDGMENT :
ROBIN PHUKAN, J.
Heard Mr. R. P. Sarma, learned Senior Counsel, assisted by Mr. A. Roshid, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. P. N. Sarma, learnedStanding Counselfor the respondents in Elementary Education Department.
2. In this petition, under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner has prayed for issuing direction to the respondent authorities to regularize her service as Lower Primary School Teacher and also, to release the arrear monthly and current salariesof the petitioner, who has been serving as Assistant Teacher, under the respondent authorities.
Background facts :-
3. The background facts, leading to filing of the present petition, are briefly stated as under -
“Pursuant to an advertisement, issued by the respondent authorities, the petitioner had applied for a post of Assistant Teacher, under the jurisdiction of Deputy Inspector of Schools, Karimganj, now Sribhumi, and she had appeared before the Sub-Divisional Level Selection Board, for Elementary EducationTeacher, Karimganj and she was selected and approved by the Sub-Divisional Level Selection Board for Elementary Education, Karimganjfor appointment in Primary School, as Primary Teacher and she was appointed and posted at No. 499,DuhaliaLower Primary School, temporarily, as StipendiaryTeacher, with monthlystipend @Rs. 900 only, vide Memo No. DIK/99/2000/A-8/1241-48, dated 20.11.1999.
Thereafter, she was appointed against a permanent vacant post, by the Deputy Inspector of Schools, Karimganj, on 28.03.2001, vide Letter No. DIK/2000-2001/A-8/1506-569, and she has been posted at No. 394 Nilmoni L.P. School, in a regular vacant post and she had joined there on 30.03.2001, and since then she has been rendering her service in the said school.
Thereafter, the Deputy Inspector of Schools, Karimganj, had issued a direction on 28.03.2001, to the Headmaster of the concerned School, directing to prepare ‘Kachabill’, with a view to forwarding the same to the concerned Block Elementary Education Officer/Deputy Inspector of Schools, for drawal of her salary and accordingly, the same was forwarded by the Headmaster, after preparation for drawal of the salary. But, no action was taken upon the same. She has not been paid any salary. Being aggrieved, the petitioner had filed one writ petition, being WP(C) No. 1103/2011, and the same was disposed of on 15.12.2011; directing the petitioner to submit all the relevant documents to the Commissioner and Secretary to the Govt. of Assam, Education Department, to examine her claim.
Thereafter, the petitioner had submitted all relevant documents before the authority and the same were examined by the Commissioner, Education Department, Dispur, Guwahati-6,and vide order, dated 18.07.2013;the prayer of the petitioner was rejected on the ground that her name does not appear in the select list of 112 Nos. of candidates, dated 27/10/1999.
It is the case of the petitioner that she had obtained the select lists, dated 27/10/1999 and 13/11/1999, through R.T.I. and found that her name appeared in the select list, dated 27/10/1999, at Serial No. 112; and that, the Order, dated 18.07.2013, was issued without due application of mind and the same is illegal and arbitrary and is liable to be set aside and quashed. And, it is also the case of the petitioner that she has not been paid salary, for which, she has been suffering from serious financial hardship.
Thereafter, vide letter, dated 11.05.2001, from the Secretary to the Government of Ass
Point of Law : When there is an effective adjudication by this Court that the petitioner is entitled to parity.
Continuous service obligates salary payment despite appointment legality, and equal treatment demands non-discriminatory enforcement of employment rights.
The court ruled that past employment irregularities do not excuse non-payment of salaries owed under earlier judicial orders, establishing a duty to pay on the principle of quantum meruit.
Salary claims in public service are contingent upon the legality of the appointment; illegal appointments do not confer entitlement to salary.
Valid appointments made under existing rules cannot be retroactively invalidated by later amendments or determinations of sanctioned strength.
Process of judicial interpretation lies in extending or applying by analogy ratio decidendi of an earlier case to a subsequent case which differs from it in certain essentials.
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.