ORDER

08.09.2022 Date :

Heard Mr. A. Mobaraque, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Mr.

R.Mazumder, learned standing counsel, Secondary Education Department for respondent Nos. 1, 3, 4, 5 and 6. Mr. R.Borpujari, learned standing counsel for respondent No.2.

2. The petitioner applied for the post of Assistant Teacher in the graduate scale in the year 1992. Interview was conducted by the District Level Selection Committee and the petitioner was thereafter appointed as Assistant Teacher in the undergraduate scale in the Union High School, Dalugram by order dated 26.05.1992. The petitioner joined as Assistant Teacher in the undergraduate scale on 01.06.1992. By an order dated 07.04.1993, issued by the Inspector of Schools, CDC, Silchar petitioner was transferred and allowed to officiate as Additional Science graduate teacher in the Earle Higher Secondary School, Lakhipur. The petitioner joined the Earle Higher Secondary School on 17.04.1993. Thereafter, the Inspector of Schools issued another order dated 17.04.1993, staying the earlier transfer order of the petitioner dated 07.04.1993.

3. Being aggrieved, petitioner approached this Court by filing Civil Rule No.1112/1993, challenging the stay order dated 17.04.1993. By order dated 27.01.1998, Civil Rule No.1112/1993 was allowed and the relevant portion of the order reads as under:

“6. The statement made by the petitioner in the writ petition on oath has not been controverted by the respondents by filing any counter affidavit. This being the position, the averments made in the writ petition are presumed to be admitted. It would appear that the petitioner had applied for the post of Assistant Teacher in the graduate scale in the year 1992. After interview, he was found suitable and selected by the District Level Selection Committee. The respondent No.3, the Inspector of Schools, Cachar District Circle, Silchar eventually appointed him as Assistant Teacher in the undergraduate scale. There is also no reason arrear given in the order of appointment, Annexure-1, as to why the applicant interviewed for appointment as a graduate teacher was appointed in the undergraduate scale. However, on representation preferred by the petitioner, the Inspector transferred him to Earle Higher Secondary School, Lakhipur and allowed him to officiate as an additional Science teacher in the graduate scale. This order stood implemented on joining of the petitioner on 17-4-93 as is evident from Annexure-6, the letter written by the Principal of Earle Higher Secondary School. Since the petitioner had already joined his new assignment, there was obviously no scope for stay of the transfer order dated 7-4-93. As such, the stay order which was passed on 17-4-93 became infructuous. In a situation like this, the question of stay and release on the basis of such stay order as is insisted by the Inspector vide Annexure-7 does not arise.

7. The order of stay passed on 17-4-93 reads as follows:-

“The orders issued vide this office Memo No.5598-693 dt.7-4-93 is hereby stayed until further orders.

Sd/- N. Sarmah, Inspector of Schools, C.D.C.

Silchar.

The order reproduced above shows that the operation of the transfer order made on

7-4-93 was stayed until further orders. No reason has been assigned by the Inspector of Schools as to why it became necessary to stay the operation of the transfer order made on 7-4-93. The learned counsel for the State also could not advance any reason justifying this order. In fact, there is no material before this court to evaluate the reasonableness of the order of stay passed on 7-4-93. In order to judge the validity of an administrative order, the court is to find if the decision made under scrutiny is illegal or suffers from procedural improprieties or is one which no sensible decision maker will, on the material before him and within the framework of the law, arrive at. For want of reason, the impugned order appears to be irrational in the sense that it is opposed to logic and, as suc