Disposed

Binoy Kumar Yadav and 8 Ors. v. the State of Assam and 7 Ors.

Gauhati HC10 Nov 2021WP(C)/1532/2013

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioners challenged recruitment without reservation in Madrassa Education. The bench observed the writ petition is closed due to lack of surviving cause of action as the impugned process was cancelled and matters pending. However, it was observed that the Government must apply reservation laws when mandated. The petition was disposed accordingly.

What did the court decide?

The writ petition was disposed of. The Court observed that the Government is bound to make reservation law applicable for any recruitment when law mandates the same.

Binoy Kumar Yadav and 8 Ors. Vs the State of Assam… — Service and Employment | Gauhati HC (2021)

¶1

Page No.# 1/11

¶2

GAHC010112952013

¶3

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

¶4

Case No. : WP(C)/2253/2013

¶5

MD HUSSAIN AHMED and 21 ORS S/O HAFIZ MD. NIJAM UDDIN VILL- ATTARDIAHIR PAR, P.O. MARJATKANDI DIST. KARIMGANJ, ASSAM.

¶6

2: ABU ABDULLAH MD. SHABBIR AHMED S/O MOULANA SOMOR UDDIN VILL- BHORIBOND P.O. NILAMBAZAR DIST. KARIMGANJ

¶7

ASSAM.

¶8

3: MD. MUZAKKIR HUSSAIN S/O MD. AZIR UDDIN VILL- RONGPUR P.O. BHANGA BAZAR DIST. KARIMGANJ ASSAM.

¶9

4: MD. RAYHAN UDDIN S/O LT. MD. KAMAL UDDIN VILL- BUDHAI KURI P.O. CHARAGI DIST. KARIMGANJ

¶10

ASSAM.

¶11

5: MD. ABDUL MUNIYEEM

¶12

S/O MOULANA AKLAS UDDIN VILL- CHINIPATON P.O. BHANGA BAZAR DIST. KARIMGANJ

¶13

ASSAM.

¶14

6: MD. SHAHIDUR RAHMAN

¶15

S/O LT. HAZI MAKRAM ALI VILL- CHINIPATHAN P.O. BHANGABAZAR DIST. KARIMGANJ ASSAM.

¶16

7: MD. ATAUR RAHMAN

¶17

S/O MOBARAK ALI VILL- LAMARKHOLA P.O. SHIBIRCHAK DIST. KARIMGANJ ASSAM.

¶18

Page No.# 2/11

¶19

8: MD. TAHIR AHMED S/O MD. ZIADUL HOQUE VILL- TINGHORI P.O. KATIGORAH DIST. KARIMGANJ ASSAM. 9: NAZRUL ISLAM S/O MD. SIRAJ UDDIN VILL- PANIGHAT P.O. PNIGHAT DIST. KARIMGANJ ASSAM. 10: MANJUR AHMED S/O LT. MD. MUHIB ALI VILL- PANIGHAT P.O. PANIGHAT DIST. KARIMGANJ ASSAM VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM and 7 ORS TO BE REP. BY THE CHIEF SECRETARY TO THE GOVT. OF ASSAM, DISPUR, GUWAHATI-6.

¶20

Advocate for the Petitioner : MR.A K TALUKDAR

¶21

Advocate for the Respondent : SC, EDU

¶22

Linked Case : WP(C)/2949/2013

¶23

ASMA KHATUN and 4 ORS D/O LT. ABDUL SATTAR R/OF RAM BORA ROAD FOUZDARY PATTY P.O. NAGAON DIST. NAGAON ASSAM.

¶24

2: NARGIS SULTANA D/O ABDUL HASHIM VILL- RANGALU SUTARGAON P.O. JAMUGURI DIST. NAGAON ASSAM.

¶25

Page No.# 3/11

¶26

3: NAMIMA KHATUN D/O ISMAT ALI VILL- RAMPUR SATRA P.O. KADAMONI DIST. NAGAON ASSAM. 4: MD. ABUL BASHAR S/O MD. AMIR UDDIN VILL- MELEKADHING P.O. BALIKATIA DIST. NAGAON ASSAM. 5: MD. ANWAR HUSSAIN S/O MD. ABUL KALAM VILL- BOGARIGURI P.O. JURIA DIST. NAGAON ASSAM. VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM AND 8 ORS TO BE REP. BY THE SECRETARY TO THE GOVT. OF ASSAM EDUCATION SECONDARY DEPARTMENT DISPUR GUWAHATI-6. 2:THE DIRECTOR OF MADRASSA EDUCATION ASSAM KAHILIPARA GUWAHATI-19. 3:THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER NAGAON DIST. NAGAON ASSAM. 4:THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR MADRASSA EDUCATION ASSAM-CUM-SECRETARY STATE MADRASSA EDUCATION BOARD ASSAM KAHILIPARA GUWAHATI-19. 5:THE INSPECTOR OF SCHOOLS NAGAON DISTRICT CIRCLE DIST. NAGAON ASSAM. 6:THE SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE NAGAON DIST. NAGAON

¶27

Page No.# 4/11

¶28

ASSAM. 7:THE OFFICER IN-CHARGE BATADRAVA POLICE STATION. 8:THE OFFICER IN-CHARGE

¶29

NAGAON SADAR POLICE STATION DIST. NAGAON ASSAM. 9:THE SELECTION BOARD/COMMITTEE OF KADAMONI SENIOR MADRASSA TO BE REP.BY THE MEMBER SECRETARY-CUM- SUPERINTENDENT OF KADAMONI SENIOR MADRASSA VILL and P.O. KADAMONI PIN CODE- DIST. NAGAON ASSAM.

¶30

¶31

Advocate for : MR.M A I HUSSAIN Advocate for : SC EDU appearing for THE STATE OF ASSAM AND 8 ORS

¶32

Linked Case : MC/1379/2013

¶33

MD HUSSAIN AHMED and 21 ORS

¶34

VERSUS

¶35

THE STATE OF ASSAM and 7 ORS

¶36

-----------Advocate for : MR A R BHUIYAN Advocate for : MR.P NAYAK appearing for THE STATE OF ASSAM and 7 ORS

¶37

Linked Case : WP(C)/1532/2013

¶38

BINOY KUMAR YADAV and 8 ORS S/O- RAMNATH YADAV VILL.- BADRIBASTI P.O.- KASHIPUR DIST.- CACHAR ASSAM.

¶39

Page No.# 5/11

¶40

2: AZAD KHAN S/O- ABDUL MATLIB KHAN VILL. and P.O.- MANIPUR PART- II DIST.- CACHAR ASSAM. 3: FIROZ KHAN S/O- MD. ABDUL MATLIB VILL. and P.O.- MANIPUR PART- II DIST.- CACHAR ASSAM. 4: ABUL KASHIM S/O- TUTA MIA VILL.- SUNDARI PART- II P.O.- SUNDARI DIST.- CACHAR ASSAM. 5: ABDUS SALAM S/O- JAMIR HUSSAIN VILL.- DIDARKUSH P.O.- MATINAGAR DIST.- CACHAR ASSAM. 6: LAVA RAM RABHA S/O- LT. GOBINDA RABHA R/O- ODAL BAKRA P.O. and P.S.- LALGANESH DIST.- KAMRUP M ASSAM. 7: MOHIDUL ISLAM S/O- MONIR UDDIN VILL.- UTTAR MOHANPUR P.O.- KAPTANPUR DIST.- CACHAR ASSAM. 8: HAMIDUL ISLAM S/O- KHALILUR RAHMAN R/O- AMBIKAPUR / 6 P.O.- SILCHAR MEDICAL COLLEGE P.S.- SILCHAR DIST.- CACHAR ASSAM.

¶41

Page No.# 6/11

¶42

9: IDRISH ALI AZAD S/O- LT. INNAS ALI VILL. - BARBARADI P.O.- BARGHUL DIST.- BARPETA ASSAM. VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM AND 7 ORS TO BE REP. BY THE CHIEF SECY. TO THE GOVT. OF ASSAM DISPUR GHY- 6. 2:THE COMMISSIONER and SECY. TO THE GOVT. OF ASSAM WELFARE FOR PLAIN TRIBES AND BACKWARD CLASSES DEPTT. DISPUR GHY- 6. 3:THE COMMISSIONER and SECY. TO THE GOVT. OF ASSAM PERSONNEL DEPTT. DISPUR GHY- 6. 4:THE COMMISSIONER and SECY. TO THE GOVT. OF ASSAM JUDICIAL DEPTT. DISPUR GHY- 6. 5:THE COMMISSIONER and SECY. TO THE GOVT. OF ASSAM FINANCE DEPTT. DISPUR GHY- 6. 6:THE COMMISSIONER and SECY. TO THE GOVT. OF ASSAM EDUCATION SECONDARY DEPTT. DISPUR GHY- 6. 7:THE DIRECTOR OF MADRASSA EDUCATION ASSAM KAHILIPARA GHY- 19. 8:THE DY. DIRECTOR MADRASSA EDUCATION ASSAM - CUM- SECY. STATE MADRASSA EDUCATION BOARD ASSAM KAHILIPARA GHY- 19. 9:ALL ASSAM MADRASSA TEACHER'S AND EMPLOYEES ASSOCIATION REPRESENTED BY ITS GENERAL SECRETARY MAFIZ UDDIN AHMEDA SOCIETY REGISTERED UNDER THE SOCIETIES REGISTRATION ACT 1860 REGISTRATION NO. 132 OF 1972-73 REGISTERED OFFICE AT DIGHALI

¶43

Page No.# 7/11

¶44

PATHER SENIOR MADRASSA P.O- ROWMARI DISTRICT- MORIGAON ASSAM. 10:HAFIZ HUSSAIN AHMED S/O ASAD UDDIN VILLAGE- AMALGRAM P.O- BARAIGRAM DISTRICT- KARIMGANJ PIN- 788723 ASSAM.

¶45

-----------Advocate for : DR.B AHMED Advocate for : MR.R DUBEYR-10 appearing for THE STATE OF ASSAM AND 7 ORS

¶46

Linked Case : MC/1151/2013

¶47

BINOY KUMAR YADAV and 8 ORS

¶48

VERSUS

¶49

THE STATE OF ASSAM AND 7 ORS

¶50

-----------Advocate for : MR.M A I HUSSAIN Advocate for : SC FINANCE appearing for THE STATE OF ASSAM AND 7 ORS

¶51

BEFORE

¶52

HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ARUN DEV CHOUDHURY

¶53

ORDER

¶54

Date : 10-11-2021

¶55

Heard Mr. A.R. Bhuyan, learned counsel for the petitioners and Mr. R. Mazumdar, learned Government Advocate, Assam, appearing for the State respondent Nos. 1 to 7 and

¶56

Page No.# 8/11

¶57

Mr. R. Dubey, learned counsel for the respondent No. 8.

¶58

The brief facts of the case of the petitioners are as under: -

¶59

The petitioners belong to backward, handicapped and other reserved categories and aspirant for job in the provincialised Madrassa.

¶60

On a challenge to the recruitment without earmarking the reserved category vacancies, pursuant to the direction of this court in WP(C) No. 113/2009, the State Chief Secretary passed an order on 9.6.2010, declaring that the selection exercise for the posts of Principal and Superintendent of Madrassa are invalid and accordingly, fresh process was directed.

¶61

It is also the case of the petitioners that through a notification dated 21.6.2012, the Director of Madrassa Education, Assam sought approval for filling up of open category vacancies and accordingly, the Government through notification dated 12.9.2012 gave clearance to fill up the unreserved vacancies.

¶62

The grievance of the petitioners was that such exercise was carried out without identifying the reserved category of vacancies. Accordingly the notification dated 12.9.2012 is being put to challenge. The further prayer of the writ petitioners is for a direction to make provision for reservation in the vacancies concerned.

¶63

While such challenge was pending before this court, the said notification dated 12.9.2012 was put to challenge in another set of writ petitions. The facts also remains that pursuant to the said selection process through the notification dated 12.9.2012, altogether 49 teaching staff were appointed in 7 (seven) Madrassas.

¶64

Subsequently, the entire selection process initiated vide notification dated 12.9.2012 was cancelled by W.T. Message Memo No. ASE.164.2013/8, dated 21.12.2013. Such

¶65

Page No.# 9/11

¶66

cancellation was also put under challenge in a separate batch of writ petitions.

¶67

The facts also remains that subsequent to such cancellation of fresh recruitment process by way of advertisement bearing No. RNSA/TET/Madrassa/342/2014/1 dated 30.08.2014 was initiated. Such notification was also put under challenge by way of another set of writ petitions.

¶68

Thereafter, this court vide order dated 22.7.2019, passed in WP (C) No. 7811/2015 and other connected cases inter alia held as follows:

¶69

(i) Thus, the recruitment drives initiated by (i) notification No. ASE.258/2010/Pt.-III/84, dated 12.09.2012 issued by the Secretary to the Govt. of Assam, Secondary Education Department, the process for filing up 470 posts of teacher lying vacant in various Madrassa Institutions under the Assam State Madrassa Education Board, and (ii) Communication under Memo No. DME. 491/Apptt.2010/129, dated 13.09.2012, the Director of Madrassa Education, Assam had come to an end on being cancelled by W.T. Message under Memo No. ASE.164.2013/8 dated 21.12.2013. The second point of the determination is answered accordingly.

¶70

(ii) Consequently, as regards, 49 teaching staff, who were appointed in 7 Madrassas pursuant to notification No. ASE.258/ 2010/Pt.III/84 dated 12.09.2012, this Court is constrained to observe that as this Court has upheld the validity of W.T. message under Memo No. ASE.164/2013/8 dated 21.12.2013 issued by the Commissioner & Secretary to the Govt. of Assam, Secondary Education Department, it would be open to the Secondary Education Department and/or the Directorate of Madrassa Education, Assam to take such measures as they may be so advised.

¶71

(iii) The recruitment process initiated vide advertisement dated 30.08.2014 was a fresh recruitment drive, which cannot be said to be a continuation of the recruitment process that

¶72

Page No.# 10/11

¶73

was initiated by the previous notification dated 12.09.2012.

¶74

(iv) Non-TET candidates who had participated in the previous recruitment drive that was initiated vide advertisement 12.09.2012 is to be given within a particular time frame to be eligible for future recruitment.

¶75

(v) The Director of Madrassa Education was allowed to go ahead with the recruitment process initiated vide advertisement dated 30.08.2014.

¶76

It was also brought to the notice, during the course of argument that 49 teachers, who were recruited subsequent to the recruitment process initiated vide notification dated 12.09.2012 were terminated and such termination was challenged before this court and the same is pending for final adjudication.

¶77

In view of the aforesaid intervening facts and upholding of cancellation of recruitment drive, initiated in the year 2012, nothing survived to be adjudicated in the present list. While admitting such factual and legal situation, Mr. Bhuyan, learned counsel for the petitioners makes a prayer that still a direction can be issued to make the provision for reservation in the recruitment of staff/teacher in the Madrassa Education.

¶78

Countering such objection, the learned Standing Counsel makes a submission that laws relating to Madrassa Education has already been repealed and by virtue of such repeal, no Madrassa institutions are survived as on date in the State. However, existing staff / teachers are to be accommodated in other provincialsed schools.

¶79

Be that as it may, this writ petition is closed for want of any surviving cause of action. However, it is observed that the Government is bound to make reservation law applicable for any recruitment when law mandates the same.

¶80

Page No.# 11/11

¶81

With the above observation, this writ petition is disposed off.

¶82

No order as to costs.

¶83

JUDGE

¶84

Comparing Assistant

Binoy Kumar Yadav and 8 Ors. v. the State of Assam and 7 Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Binoy Kumar Yadav and 8 Ors. v. the State of Assam and 7 Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Nurul Islam Vs the State of Assam and Ors.

Ajmat Khandakar Vs the State of Assam and Ors.

Dr. Umesh Barman Vs the State of Assam and Ors.

Binoy Kumar Yadav and 8 Ors. Vs the State of Assam and 7 Ors.

Apurba Kumar Deka Vs the State of Assam and 6 Ors.

Halchai Kherowar and Anr, Vs State of Assam and Anr.