GAHC010216852021 2026:GAU-AS:1594 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)

Case No. : WP(C)/7047/2021 JADABANANDA SAIKIA S/O LATE BIMAL CHANDRA SAIKIA RESIDENT OF VILLAGE MAJARATI,PO MAJARATI, PS SADAR, DIST NAGAON,ASSAM 782002 VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM AND 3 ORS REPRESENTED BY THE COMMISSIONER AND SECRETARY TO THE GOVT. OF ASSAM, SECONDARY EDUCATION DEPARTMENT, DISPUR, GUWAHATI

06

2:THE DIRECTOR TO THE GOVT. OF ASSAM SECONDARY EDUCATION DEPARTMENT KAHILIPARA GUWAHATI 781019

3:THE INSPECTOR OF SCHOOLS MORIGAON DISTRICT CIRCLE MORIGAON ASSAM

4:THE DISTRICT SCRUTINY COMMITTEE REPRESENTED BY ITS CHAIRMAN OFFICE OF THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER MORIGAON ASSA Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. K N CHOUDHURY, MR. R M DEKA,MR. D J DAS Advocate for the Respondent : GA, ASSAM, SC. EDU.

BEFORE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE NELSON SAILO

O R D E R

06.02.2026 Heard Mr. D.J. Das, learned counsel for the petitioner and Ms. R.

Barua, learned Standing Counsel, Secondary Education Department. Having regard to the nature of grievance projected by the petitioner, the writ petition is taken up for disposal at this stage.

2. It is the case of the petitioner that he is serving as a Post Graduate Teacher in Advance Hindi subject at Hazi Amsar Ali Mukhtar Girls Senior Secondary School. According to the petitioner, he was appointed in the school on 05.07.2007 and became eligible for provincialisation of his service under the Assam Education (Provincialisation of Services of Teachers and Re-Organisation of Educational Institutions) Act, 2017 (in short Act of 2017). The Principal of the school vide application dated 31.05.2017 submitted the particulars of the petitioner as well as other teachers of the school for provincialisation of their services before the Inspector of Schools, MDC, Morigaon in the prescribed format. The District Scrutiny Committee upon scrutinizing the particulars, recommended the services of the petitioner to be provincialised. However, the surprise of the petitioner, he found his name to be not uploaded in the said list. Being aggrieved, he submitted an application on 24.08.2020 before the respondent No.2 for inclusion of his name amongst the provincialised teachers published on 18.08.2020. Despite the same, since no steps was taken in that regard, the petitioner has filed the instant writ petition.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that as per the scrutiny slip for provincialisation of services prepared by the Inspector of Schools, MDC, Morigaon, the number of enrolment of students in the Advance Hindi for the years 2014, 2015 and 2016 were 13, 13 and 15 students respectively. Since the minimum enrolment required as per the relevant provision is 10 students, the petitioner clearly qualifies to be considered for provincialisation of his service. Moreover, the Inspector of Schools, Morigaon submitted his inspection report before the Director of Secondary Education on 11.02.2021, wherein the name of the petitioner was at Serial No.12 and he was amongst those who were found qualified to be considered for provincialisation. Such being the case, the learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the case of the petitioner should be directed to be considered for provincialisation by the respondent authorities within a time frame.

4. Per-contra, Ms. R. Barua, learned Standing Counsel, Secondary Education Department referring to the counter affidavit filed by the respondents on 25.08.2022 submits that the services of the petitioner could not be provincialised as the enrolment of student in Advance Hindi subject during the year 2016 in the HSSLC Final Examination was only 08(eight) as per the Assam Higher Secondary Education Council report, whereas the minimum requirement is 10(ten) students as per the Act of 2017, amended in 2018. Therefore, she submits that it was due to this, the petitioner’s services could not be provincialised.

5. I have considered the submissions made by the learned counsel for the partie