Disposed

Ashamoon Konch v. the State of Assam and 3 Ors.

Gauhati HC9 Nov 2021WP(C)/3170/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioner, appointed as graduate teacher, challenged the recall of his appointment as in-charge Headmaster after school amalgamation. Court directed authorities to verify petitioner's 10-year experience requirement before deciding to withdraw or continue the appointment.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner granted hearing to substantiate experience; if qualified, previous order recalled; otherwise reasoned order passes without recalling order.

Ashamoon Konch Vs the State of Assam and 3 Ors. — Education and Admissions | Gauhati HC (2021)

¶1

Page No.# 1/4

¶2

GAHC010096562021

¶3

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

¶4

Case No. : WP(C)/3170/2021

¶5

ASHAMOON KONCH

¶6

W/O MR. HEMANTA DUTTA, R/O VILL. BILOTIA, P.O. AND P.S. MACHKHOWA, DIST. DHEMAJI, ASSAM.

¶7

VERSUS

¶8

THE STATE OF ASSAM AND 3 ORS

¶9

REPRESENTED BY THE COMMISSIONER AND SECY. TO THE GOVT. OF ASSAM, EDUCATION (SECONDARY) DEPTT., SACHIVALAYA, DISPUR, GUWAHATI 6

¶10

2:THE DEPUTY SECY. TO THE GOVT. OF ASSAM

¶11

EDUCATION (SECONDARY) DEPTT. SACHIVALAYA DISPUR GUWAHATI 6

¶12

3:THE DIRECTOR OF SECONDARY EDUCATION

¶13

ASSAM KAHILIPARA GUWHATI 19

¶14

4:THE INSPECTOR OF SCHOOL

¶15

D.D.C. DHEMAJI DIST. DHEMAJI ASSAM

¶16

Advocate for the Petitioner : MR S BORTHAKUR

¶17

Page No.# 2/4

¶18

Advocate for the Respondent : SC, SEC. EDU.

¶19

BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ACHINTYA MALLA BUJOR BARUA

¶20

Date : 09-11-2021

¶21

JUDGMENT & ORDER (ORAL)

¶22

Heard Mr. S Borthakur, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. R Majumdar, learned counsel for the respondents No.1, 2, 3 and 4 being the authorities under the Secondary Education Department, Government of Assam.

¶23

The petitioner, who is a master degree holder in Arts as well as having the B.Ed degree was appointed as a graduate teacher (Arts) in the Jorkata MV School in the Dhemaji district on 28.06.2013.

¶24

In the year 2018, the Jorkata MV School was amalgamated with the Jorkata High School which is located in the same campus under the Siksha Khetra - scheme for amalgamation of schools. At the time, when the school was amalgamated Sri Dibiya Dutta was the In-charge Headmaster of the school and he retired on 31.05.2021. On his retirement, the Director of Secondary Education Assam by an order dated 10.05.2021 allowed the petitioner to be the in-charge Headmaster of the amalgamated Jorkata High School, w.e.f. 01.06.2021. Accordingly on 01.06.2021, the petitioner assumed the charge of being the in-charge Headmaster of the school concerned. But by a subsequent order dated 07.06.2021, the earlier order dated 10.05.2021 was recalled and

¶25

Page No.# 3/4

¶26

canceled. Being aggrieved, this writ petition is instituted.

¶27

Mr. R Majumdar, learned counsel for the Secondary Education Department, Government of Assam contends that the order allowing the petitioner to be the in-charge Headmaster of the school was required to be withdrawn and cancelled inasmuch as, the petitioner did not have the required qualification for being a regular Headmaster i.e. he did not have the experience of 10 years service as a graduate teacher in the graduate scale of pay.

¶28

In the affidavit-in-opposition filed by the respondents in the Secondary Education Department, a further stand has also been taken that there are complaints against the petitioner. But we have noticed that the order impugned does not reflect that it was passed because of there being any such complaint against the petitioner, and, therefore, as per the law laid down by the Supreme Court in Mohinder Singh Gill & Anr. Vs. The Chief Election Commissioner, New Delhi & Ors reported in 1978 Air 851, the reasons to justify an order impugned cannot be substituted in a litigation by filing an affidavit. Consequently, the second reason of there being a complaint against the petitioner is unsustainable.

¶29

But, however, as regards the first reason that the petitioner does not have the required 10 years of experience as a graduate teacher in the graduate scale of pay, we direct the Director of Secondary Education Assam to give an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner and allow him to substantiate, if according to the petitioner he has the required 10 years of experience as a graduate teacher in a graduate scale of pay. In the event, the petitioner is able

¶30

Page No.# 4/4

¶31

to satisfy that he has the required experience of 10 years as indicated above, the order impugned dated 07.06.2021 by which the in-charge Headmastership of the petitioner was withdrawn and cancelled be withdrawn by the Director and the petitioner be allowed to continue as the in-charge Headmaster. On the other hand, if the respondent authorities arrive at a conclusion that the petitioner does not have the required 10 years of experience as a graduate teacher in the graduate scale of pay, reasoned order be passed and there would be no further requirement to recall the order dated 07.06.2021.

¶32

The reasoned order be passed by the Director within a period of one month from the date of receipt of the certified copy of this order.

¶33

Writ petition stands disposed of in the above terms.

¶34

JUDGE

¶35

Comparing Assistant

Ashamoon Konch v. the State of Assam and 3 Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ashamoon Konch v. the State of Assam and 3 Ors.

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

Ram Krishna Das Vs Prithwish Kumar Chaki and Anr.

Kailash Chandra Prodhani and Anr. Vs the State of Assam and 4 Ors.

Nirupoma Buragohain Vs Preetom Saikia and 2 Ors.

Abdul Aziz Ahmed Vs the State of Assam and 5 Ors.

Ms. Dipti Saikia @ Dipti Hazarika Vs the State of Assam and 2 Ors.

Anowara Begum Vs the State of Assam and 3 Ors.