Dismissed

Purnendu Sekhar Debnath v. Preetom Saikia, IAS and Anr.

Gauhati HC12 Feb 2020Cont.Cas(C)/703/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Guwahati High Court concluded in this contempt petition that no willful disobedience occurred when the Government refused to appoint the petitioner as Principal due to his B.Ed degree being found unrecognized. The Court held the degree's validity was contested but not yet adjudicated by the court. Petitioner may challenge the degree's rejection separately.

What did the court decide?

Contempt petition closed; Petitioner at liberty to challenge degree validity before appropriate forum.

Purnendu Sekhar Debnath Vs Preetom… — Constitutional and Fundamental Rights | Gauhati HC (2020)

¶1

Page No.# 1/3

¶2

GAHC010291282019

¶3

THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)

¶4

Case No. : Cont.Cas(C) 703/2019

¶5

1:PURNENDU SEKHAR DEBNATH

¶6

S/O- LATE BENOD BEHARI DEBNATH, R/O- ROY NAGAR, P.O- KARIMGANJ788711, DIST- KARIMGANJ, ASSAM

¶7

VERSUS

¶8

1:PREETOM SAIKIA, IAS AND ANR.

¶9

THE COMMISSIONER AND SECRETARY TO THE GOVT OF ASSAM, EDUCATION DEPTT, GOVT OF ASSAM, DISPUR, GUWAHATI- 781006

¶10

2:P JIDUNG AES THE DIRECTOR OF SECONDARY EDUCATION ASSAM KAHILIPARA GUWAHATI- 78101

¶11

Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. N DHAR

¶12

Advocate for the Respondent : MR. D MOZUMDER

¶13

BEFORE

¶14

HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE N. KOTISWAR SINGH

¶15

ORDER

¶16

Date : 12-02-2020

¶17

Heard Mr. N. Dhar, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. S.P. Bhattacharjee, learned counsel for the respondents.

¶18

2. This Contempt Petition arose out of the judgment and order dated 13.02.2019 passed

¶19

in WP(C) No.2983/2017 in which the following direction was issued:-

¶20

“ 21. In view of above discussions and taking into consideration the materials of record, this Court is of the opinion that the appointment of the respondent No. 4 Shri Asit Baran Paul as Principal of the

¶21

Page No.# 2/3

¶22

Bhikamchand Balika Bidyaniketan H.S. School, Karimganj and the respondent No. 7 in WP(C) 2706/2017, Shri Bijon Nath as the Principal in the Swarna Lakshmi Higher Secondary, School, Narshingpur, Cachar are liable to be interfered with on the ground that the said incumbents do not possess valid post-graduate degrees which is an essential requirement under the Rules. Accordingly, their respective appointments as Principals in the Schools in question are set aside and the respondent authorities would be at liberty to fill up the post from the penal of selected candidates in accordance with law.”

¶23

3. From the above, what is seen is that after setting aside the appointment of one Asit Baran Paul, the authorities were directed to fill up the post from the panel of selected candidates in accordance with law.

¶24

4. The petitioner states that the petitioner’s name is included in the list of selected candidates and, as such, he ought to have been appointed as Principal of Bhikamchand Balika Bidyaniketan HS School, Karimganj.

¶25

5. Mr. Bhattacharjee, learned counsel, submits that the aforesaid exercise was undertaken in terms of the direction of this Court. However, it was seen that at the time of verification of the certificate of the petitioner, B. Ed degree of the petitioner was found to be without recognition/permission of the NCTE and, hence, his B. Ed degree was considered to be invalid. If that is so, the petitioner cannot be appointed as Principal as mentioned in the official letter dated 30.01.2020. Accordingly, it has been submitted that no willful disobedience has been committed by the respondents.

¶26

6. Learned counsel for the petitioner, on the other hand, relying on a decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Prithawi Nath Ram Vs. State of Jharkhand and others, (2004) 7 SCC 261, has submitted that in contempt proceedings, Court is really concerned with as to whether the earlier decision of the Court has been complied or not and it would not be permissible for the Court to examine the correctness of the earlier decision, which has not been assailed and take a view different than what was taken in the earlier decision.

¶27

7. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that though B. Ed degree obtained by the petitioner has been assailed by certain adversaries, namely, Asit Baran Paul in the said writ petition, the same has not been set aside by this Court.

¶28

8. Be that as it may, since the Government has taken a specific decision that the B. Ed degree obtained by the petitioner is invalid as indicated in the official communication dated 30.01.2020, even if the Court had not taken any decision as regards the validity of his B. Ed

¶29

Page No.# 3/3

¶30

degree, right of the petitioner to derive benefits out of such a degree, which is declared to be invalid by the Government has come under a cloud.

¶31

9. Since the Government has already taken a decision that the B. Ed degree obtained by the petitioner is invalid though the same may not be found to be not correct if challenged by the petitioner, nevertheless, the fact remains that as on today, the Government has decided not to accept the B. Ed degree of the petitioner as valid.

¶32

10. In view of above, this Court is of the opinion that no willful disobedience of this Court’s has been committed by the respondents.

¶33

11. However, the petitioner would be at liberty to challenge such a decision taken by the authorities by contending that the B. Ed degree obtained by the petitioner is valid before the appropriate forum.

¶34

12. Before parting with this petition, it is made clear that in the event the petitioner is able to prove that his B. Ed degree is valid, he shall be entitled to be appointed as Principal in the concerned School as per decision of this Court rendered in WP(C) No.2983/2017 and move the appropriate forum again.

¶35

13. With the above observations and directions, this Contempt Petition is closed.

¶36

JUDGE

¶37

Comparing Assistant

Purnendu Sekhar Debnath v. Preetom Saikia, IAS and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Purnendu Sekhar Debnath v. Preetom Saikia, IAS and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

K Sasri Rajarshi Bhattacharjee Vs Sri Rajesh Kumar Singh

Madhu Deka and 11 Ors. Vs Amlan Barua and 2 Ors.

Tangir Tamut Vs Govind Jaswal

Samsul Haque Islam Vs Alok Kumar, IAS and 4 Ors.

Sad Uddin Vs Debashis Sen and Anr.

Narayan Ch. Das Vs Sasank Shekhar Shastri

Mukunda Hazarika Vs Ahmed Hussain and 5 Ors.

Krishna Nanda Sinha Vs Laya Madduri, I.A.S. and Anr.

Stuti Parashar Vs the State of Assam and 4 Ors.

Hajera Begum Mazumder Vs the State of Assam and 6 Ors.

Sunam Uddin Vs the State of Assam and 5 Ors.

Mrs. Rashmi Rekha Devi Vs the State of Assam and 3 Ors.

Amlangshu Das Vs the State of Assam and 2 Ors.

Ganeswar Saharia Vs Prahlad Ch. Das and 3 Ors.