Dismissed

The Managing Committee of the Moinul Haque Choudhury Higher Secondary School v. Aramul Haque Choudhury and 3 Ors.

Gauhati HC6 Jan 2022WA/175/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Gauhati High Court dismissed a writ appeal by the Managing Committee of Moinul Haque Choudhury Higher Secondary School challenging the Single Judge's order. The Court held that there was no scope to interfere with the lower court's view that salary liability rests with the appointing authority who acted in violation of law. It denied the committee's plea that it has no money to pay the teacher

What the court decided

AI extract

The Managing Committee of the Moinul Haque Choudhury… — Service and Employment | Gauhati HC (2022)

¶1

Page No.# 1/3

¶2

GAHC010100782018

¶3

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

¶4

Case No. : WA/175/2018

¶5

THE MANAGING COMMITTEE OF THE MOINUL HAQUE CHOUDHURY HIGHER SECONDARY SCHOOL

¶6

REP. BY THE NURUL ISLAM CHOUDHURY, SECRETARY CUM PRINCIPAL OF MOINUL HAQUE CHOUDHURY HIGHER SECONDARY SCHOOL, P.O. SONABARIGHAT, P.S. SILCHAR, DIST. CACHAR, ASSAM.

¶7

VERSUS

¶8

ARAMUL HAQUE CHOUDHURY AND 3 ORS S/O. NURUL ISLAM CHOUDHURY, VILL. AND P.O. SONABARIGHAT, P.S. SILCHAR, DIST. CACHAR, ASSAM.(WRIT PETITIONER).

¶9

2:THE STATE OF ASSAM

¶10

REP. BY THE COMMISSIONER AND SECY. TO THE GOVT. OF ASSAM EDUCATION (SECONDARY) DEPTT. DISPUR

¶11

GHY.

¶12

3:THE DIRECTOR OF SECONDARY EDUCATION

¶13

ASSAM KAHILIPARA GUWAHATI

¶14

4:THE INSPECTOR OF SCHOOL

¶15

C.D.C. CACHAR P.O. SILCHAR ASSAM

¶16

Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. A M BARBHUIYA

¶17

Page No.# 2/3

¶18

Advocate for the Respondent : GA, ASSAM

¶19

BEFORE

¶20

HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SOUMITRA SAIKIA

¶21

ORDER

¶22

06.01.2022

¶23

The matter is taken up through video conferencing. Heard Mr. A.M. Barbhuiya, learned counsel for the appellant.

¶24

This writ appeal has been filed by the Managing Committee of Moinul Haque Choudhury Higher Secondary School challenging the order of the learned Single Judge dated 05.04.2018 passed in W.P.(C) No. 3208/2013.

¶25

The writ petition was filed by the private respondent No. 1 who was a subject teacher in Moinul Haque Choudhury Higher Secondary School which is run by the Managing Committee and his claim was for regularization as a teacher and for payment of salary. His case was that he was appointed by the Managing Committee in the year 1990 and had thereafter prayed for regularization of his service, a claim which was rejected by the State Government vide order dated 21.10.2005. The private respondent No.1 had approached this Court earlier also by filing WP(C) No. 5184/2006 wherein he had challenged the order dated 21.10.2005 and had prayed that effective orders be passed for payment of his salary.

¶26

The learned Single Judge vide order dated 03.05.2011 passed in WP(C) No. 5184/2006, after hearing all the concerned parties, came to the conclusion that appointment of the writ petitioner/respondent No. 1 was made de hors the law. It was made by the Managing Committee on a non-existent post and in fact the

¶27

Page No.# 3/3

¶28

Managing Committee had no authority to make such an appointment and, therefore, since the appointment itself was bad and was made against a nonexistent post, no order for regularization could have been made. Accordingly, his claim for regularization of service was rejected. As regarding payment of salary, it was stated in Paragraph No. 13 as follows:-

¶29

“ 13. But since it was the managing committee which appointed the petitioner against a non-existent post, if any salary claim is to be entertained, the obligation to make such salary payment would lie on the appointing authority i.e. the managing committee and not against the Government and the Public ex-chequer. Accordingly, while rejecting he petitioner’s claim for salary from the Public ex-chequer, he is permitted to make a claim for salary payment from the concerned managing committee which gave him appointment to the non-existent post.”.

¶30

The Managing Committee has now filed the present appeal stating that it has no money and it cannot pay the salary. We, however, fail to understand as to how an interference can be made with the order of the learned Single Judge. The admitted position is that it was the Managing Committee which had appointed the private respondent No. 1 in violation of law and therefore, if there is any claim regarding salary, it has to be paid by the Managing Committee and none else.

¶31

Therefore, we find no scope for interference with the order of the learned Single Judge. The writ appeal is dismissed.

¶32

JUDGE CHIEF JUSTICE

¶33

Comparing Assistant

The Managing Committee of the Moinul Haque Choudhury Higher Secondary School v. Aramul Haque Choudhury and 3 Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What the court decided

The Managing Committee of the Moinul Haque Choudhury Higher Secondary School v. Aramul Haque Choudhury and 3 Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Dipika Sharma and Anr. Vs Indian Bank and 2 Ors.

Sri Amarjit Barman and 5 Ors. Vs the State of Assam and 4 Ors.

Purbanchaliya Rail Karmi Parishad Vs the Union of India and 4 Ors.

Eunus Ali Vs the State of Assam and 10 Ors.

Basistha Krishna Charan @ Bashistha Krishna Charan and Anr. Vs the Deputy Commissioner, Karbi Anglong and 4 Ors.

On the Death of Anup Kumar Das His Legal Heirs Vs the Union of India and 5 Ors.