Allowed

Hem Chandra Das and 3 Ors. v. the State of Assam and 4 Ors.

Gauhati HC14 Mar 2022WP(C)/713/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Gauhati High Court allowed a writ petition filed by four petitioners seeking benefits under Assured Career Progression Scheme. The Court held that upgradation from intermediate to graduate scale without financial benefit did not bar entitlement. The Court directed the Director of Secondary Education to determine further eligibility within two months and grant the scheme benefits if no other fi

What did the court decide?

The writ petition is allowed. The Director of Secondary Education is directed to determine if the petitioners received any other financial upgradation or promotion and, if not, to grant the Assured Ca

Hem Chandra Das and 3 Ors. Vs the State of… — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Gauhati HC (2022)

¶1

Page No.# 1/4

¶2

GAHC010024312020

¶3

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

¶4

Case No. : WP(C)/713/2020

¶5

HEM CHANDRA DAS AND 3 ORS. S/O LT. SRIKANTA DAS, R/O VILL. HALAPAKRI, P.O. HOWLY, DIST. BARPETA, PIN-781316

¶6

2: NURUDDIN AHMED S/O LT. MAINUDDIN. R/O VILL. DABALIAPARA DIST. BARPETA PIN-781316

¶7

3: ADDUR ROUF S/O LT. RAHIMUDDIN R/O HOWLY TOWN WARD NO. 1 P.O. HOWLY DIST. BARPETA PIN-781316 4: ABDUL HAKIM AHMED S/O LT. ABDUL HAMID R/O VILL. BOGAIJANPARA P.O. JOSIHATIPARA DIST. BARPETA PIN-78131

¶8

VERSUS

¶9

THE STATE OF ASSAM AND 4 ORS.

¶10

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

¶11

2:THE DIRECTOR OF SECONDARY EDUCATION KAHILIPARA GUWAHATI-19

¶12

Page No.# 2/4

¶13

3:THE COMMISSIONER AND SECRETARY TO THE GOVT. OF ASSAM FINANCE DEPTT. DISPUR GUWAHATI-6 4:THE INSPECTOR OF SCHOOLS BARPETA DIST. CIRCLE BARPETA DIST. BARPETA ASSAM 5:THE SCREENING COMMITTEE CONSTITUTED UNDER ASSURED CAREER PROGRESSION SCHEME 2011 REP .BY ITS CHAIRPERSON CUM INSPECTOR OF SCHOOLS BARPETA DIST. CIRCLE BARPETA DIST. BARPETA ASSA

¶14

Advocate for the Petitioner : MR A D CHOUDHURY

¶15

Advocate for the Respondent : SC, SEC. EDU.

¶16

BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE KALYAN RAI SURANA

¶17

ORDER

¶18

Date : 14.03.2022

¶19

Heard Mr. T. Chakrabarty, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. U. Sarma, learned standing counsel for the Secondary Education Department, respondent nos. 1, 2, 4 and 5 and Mr. B. Gogoi, learned standing counsel for the Finance Department, respondent no. 3.

¶20

By projecting common cause of action, the four petitioners have filed this writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. The petitioners have claimed that as per order dated 12.11.2014 issued by the Secretary,

¶21

Page No.# 3/4

¶22

Secondary Education Department, the petitioners would be entitled to the benefit of Assured Career Progression Scheme (ACP Scheme in short).

¶23

The case projected by the petitioners is that they were appointed as Assistant Teachers pursuant to advertisement dated 03.09.1991 and though they were graduate and entitled to graduate scale of pay, but at the time of appointment, the petitioners were given intermediate scale of pay. Thereafter, vide notification dated 30.12.1993, the respondent authorities had granted graduate scale of pay to all the Assistant Teachers who were graduates and thereafter, the petitioners had started receiving graduate scale of pay from December, 1994. Having rendered more than 20 (twenty) years of continuous service, the petitioners claim to have become entitled to ACP Scheme, which was introduced from the year 2011 and that notwithstanding a clarificatory order bearing number ASE 715/2013/33 dated 12.11.2014 was issued in respect of those intermediate teachers, who were upgraded to graduate teachers without any financial benefits to be entitled to benefit under ACP Scheme, however, the petitioners were not given the benefit of ACP Scheme and accordingly, this writ petition has been filed. It is also submitted that the petitioners would be entitled to be considered for two financial upgradation under the ACP Scheme.

¶24

It further appears from hereinbefore referred order dated 12.11.2014 that the Secondary Education Department had clarified and decided that the intermediate teachers of different high schools and higher secondary schools who were upgraded to graduate posts without any financial benefits, the upgradation in respect of categories of teachers without financial benefit shall not be a bar for getting financial upgradation under ACP Scheme. Therefore, the

¶25

Page No.# 4/4

¶26

petitioners have been able to satisfy the Court that upgradation from intermediate scale of pay to the graduate scale of pay cannot be termed as a benefit which would prevent the petitioners from getting benefit under the ACP Scheme.

¶27

As the petitioners are found entitled to two financial upgradation under the ACP Scheme, the Court is inclined to provide that the Director of Secondary Education, Assam (respondent no.2) upon receipt of a certified copy of this order would undertake an exercise to determine as to whether apart from getting financial upgradation from intermediate scale of pay to graduate scale of pay, the petitioners have received any promotion or any other financial upgradation and if the petitioners are found not to have received any financial upgradation or promotion, save and except getting graduate scale of pay w.e.f. December, 1994, the respondent no.2 shall pass necessary orders within a period of 2 (two) months from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order to grant ACP Scheme benefit to the petitioners in accordance with law.

¶28

The writ petition stands allowed to the extent as indicated above.

¶29

Comparing Assistant

Hem Chandra Das and 3 Ors. v. the State of Assam and 4 Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Hem Chandra Das and 3 Ors. v. the State of Assam and 4 Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Pawan Sonam Vs the State of Ap and 2 Ors.

Anchen Taflap Vs the State of Ap and 6 Ors.

Kaheka Pralo Vs Kaling Tayeng and Anr.

Jatindra Nath Roy, Vs Kalyani Sikdar and 6 Ors.

Sarabari Ghosh Vs the Union of India and 3 Ors.

Probin Boruah Vs the State of Assam and 5 Ors.