Allowed

Hasima Begum @ Hasima Bibi v. the State of Assam and 11 Ors.

Gauhati HC25 Apr 2022WP(C)/7469/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The petitioner challenged the selection and appointment of a respondent as an Anganwadi worker, alleging reliance on a fake transfer certificate. The court stayed adjudication due to insufficient proof of service on the respondent. It directed the Joint Director of Social Welfare to investigate the authenticity of the certificate and ensure due hearing, granting the writ petition.

What did the court decide?

The writ petition was allowed; the Joint Director-cum-CHD, Social Welfare Department, BTC, Kokrajhar was directed to investigate the authenticity of the transfer certificate relied upon for appointmen

Hasima Begum @ Hasima Bibi Vs the State of Assam… — Education and Admissions | Gauhati HC (2022)

¶1

Page No.# 1/6

¶2

GAHC010239422018

¶3

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

¶4

Case No. : WP(C)/7469/2018

¶5

HASIMA BEGUM @ HASIMA BIBI W/O- SHAHIDUR RAHMAN, R/O- VILL- NOWERBHITA, P.O. AND P.S. KOKRAJHAR, DIST- KOKRAJHAR, BTAD, ASSAM, PIN- 783346

¶6

VERSUS

¶7

THE STATE OF ASSAM AND 11 ORS. REP. BY THE COMM. AND SECY. TO THE GOVT. OF ASSAM, SOCIAL WELFARE DEPTT., DISPUR, GHY-6

¶8

2:THE DIRECTOR OF SOCIAL WELFARE DEPTT. ASSAM UZANBAZAR GHY-1

¶9

3:THE JOINT DIRECTOR-CUM-CHD SOCIAL WELFARE DEPTT. BTC KOKRAJHAR PIN- 783370

¶10

4:THE PROGRAMME OFFICER DIVISIONAL ICDS CELL KOKRAJHAR PIN- 783370

¶11

5:THE DISTRICT SOCIAL WELFARE OFFICER KOKRAJJHAR PIN- 783370

¶12

6:THE DY. COMMISSIONER KOKRAJHAR

¶13

Page No.# 2/6

¶14

ASSAM PIN- 783370 7:THE SELECTION COMMITTEE FOR SELECTION OF ANGANWADI WORKER (MINI) AND HELPER FOR DOTMA ICDS PROJECT REP. BY ITS CHAIRMAN B.T.C. (BTAD) P.O. AND P.S. AND DIST- KOKRAJHAR ASSAM PIN- 783370 8:THE CHILD DEVELOPMENT PROJECT OFFICER DOTMA ICDS PROJECT DOTMA P.O. AND P.S. AND DIST- KOKRAJHAR BTAD ASSAM PIN- 783370 9:MD. USMAN GANI SK (MEMBER OF SELECTION COMMITTEE OF DOTMA ICDS PROJECT DOTMA) S/O- LT BASIR SK R/O- VILL- HEKAIPARA P.O. AND P.S. KOKRAJHAR DIST- KOKRAJHAR BTAD ASSAM PIN- 783370 10:THE PRINCIPAL SAKTI ASHRAM HIGHER SECONDARY AND VOC SCHOOL P.O. SAKTI ASHRAM P.S. KOKRAJHAR DIST- KOKRAJHAR ASSAM PIN- 783370 11:THE HEADMASTER MOWAMARI M.E.SCHOOL VILL- MMOWAMARI P.O. KAMAL SING P.S. GOSSAIGAON DIST- KOKRAJHAR BTAD ASSAM PIN- 783370 12:SMTI. SAHINUR BIBI

¶15

Page No.# 3/6

¶16

W/O- AFJUDDIN SK VILL- NOWERBHITA P.O. AND P.S. DOTMA DIST- KOKRAJHAR BTAD ASSAM PIN- 783370 13:THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY

¶17

BTR(BTC) KOKRAJHAR PIN- 78337

¶18

Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. M U MONDAL

¶19

Advocate for the Respondent : GA, ASSAM (R- 1 to 8)

¶20

BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ACHINTYA MALLA BUJOR BARUA

¶21

ORDER

¶22

Date : 25-04-2022

¶23

Heard Mr. M.U. Mondal, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Ms. S. Barua, learned Junior Government Advocate for the respondents No. 1, 2 and 6, Mr. S. Bora, learned counsel for the respondents No. 3, 4, 5, 7 & 8 and Mr. M. Hussain, learned counsel for the respondent No.10.

¶24

Both the petitioner and the respondent No.12 participated in the selection process for appointment as Anganwadi worker in the 35 No. Polashguri (Muslimpara) Mini Anganwadi Centre as per the notification dated 21.07.2016 of the Social Welfare Department.

¶25

It is stated that the Social Welfare Department being a transferred subject under the 6^th Schedule to the Constitution of India, the appropriate authority for making the selection would be the authorities under the Social Welfare Department of the BTC.

¶26

Page No.# 4/6

¶27

The grievance raised is that the respondent No.12 was selected and appointed as the Anganwadi worker pursuant to such selection. But in the selection process the respondent No.12 relied upon a transfer certificate issued by Sakti Ashram Higher Secondary & Voc. School in the Kokrajhar district. The allegation made in this writ petition is that the said certificate is a false certificate.

¶28

The respondent No.10 being the Principal of Sakti Ashram Higher Secondary & Voc School has filed an affidavit stating that the said certificate is a false certificate which was not validly issued by the school concerned. Infact, in the affidavit of the respondent No.10, the certificate bearing serial No.426 which was issued by the Sakti Ashram Higher Secondary & Voc School is annexed as Annexure-1 to the affidavit-in-opposition of the respondent No.10 which prima facie shows that the said certificate was issued to another person namely Tozamil Hoque and not to the respondent No.12. Prima facie the certificate relied upon by the respondent No.12 appears to be a false and fabricated certificate which is not only an act of relying upon fabricated and false document in a selection process but would also amount to a criminal offence.

¶29

We are unable to proceed further in the writ petition inasmuch as the respondent No.12 could not be duly served as neither the A/D card nor the unserved notice was received back although there is an order of the Lawazima Court dated 18.02.2021, wherein, notices were deemed to have been served on the respondent No.12. A deemed service neither allows the Court to arrive at a conclusion as to whether the notices were infact served or not. Consequently, it may not be appropriate to pass adverse order against the respondent No.12 in the absence of there being a definite conclusion as to whether notices were duly served.

¶30

Page No.# 5/6

¶31

We have already taken note of that the selection and appointment process was under the Social Welfare Department under the BTC. Accordingly, we direct the Joint Director-cum-CHD, Social Welfare Department, BTC, Kokrajhar to examine the matter as to whether the respondent No.12 was appointed as the Anganwadi worker of 35 No. Polashguri (Muslimpara) in a selection process where she had relied upon a fake transfer certificate issued by the Sakti Ashram Higher Secondary & Voc School. For the purpose, the Joint Director to give a hearing to the respondent No.12. The Joint Director to also take note of the affidavit-in-opposition of the respondent No.10 being the Principal of Sakti Ashram Higher Secondary & Voc School to the extent that the Certificate No.426 relied upon by the respondent No.12 was infact not a certificate issued by the said school to the respondent No.12 and whereas, the Certificate No.426 was actually issued to another person namely Tozamil Hoque. In doing so, the Joint Director may give a hearing also to the present writ petitioner. If upon the exercise to be under taken by the Joint Director, a conclusion is arrived that the respondent No.12 relied upon a fabricated school certificate to achieve the selection process leading to the order of appointment, appropriate orders be passed against the respondent No.12 by not allowing such person who had availed an appointment by fraudulent means to continue in service any further. Relying upon a fabricated document in a selection process would also be a criminal offence. The Joint Director to take steps to initiate appropriate proceeding if in the event a conclusion is arrived that the respondent No.12 had relied upon a false and fabricated certificate to procedure the appointment. On the other hand, if the Joint Director arrives at a conclusion that the certificate was a genuine certificate, appropriate order be passed. The requirement be done within a period of three months from the date of receipt of the certified

¶32

Page No.# 6/6

¶33

copy of the order.

¶34

Compliance of this order be informed to the Registry.

¶35

Writ petition allowed as indicated above.

¶36

JUDGE

¶37

Comparing Assistant

Hasima Begum @ Hasima Bibi v. the State of Assam and 11 Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Hasima Begum @ Hasima Bibi v. the State of Assam and 11 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

Tarka Bahadur Cheti @ Tarkabahadur Chetry Vs the State of Assam and 3 Ors.

Prabhat Nath and 7 Ors. Vs the Presiding Officer and Ors.

Bacchu Das Vs the State of Assam and 4 Ors.

Dilip Das and 6 Ors. Vs the State of Assam and 3 Ors.

Bornali Gogoi Vs the State of Assam and 3 Ors.

Simi Roy Vs the State of Assam and 3 Ors.