Petitioner filed a contempt petition for alleged non-compliance regarding provincialisation of service. Court held respondents complied with the prior order as petitioner's name was missing in official records, dismissing the petition and recalling the notice.
Contempt petition dismissed; notice of contempt recalled.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
Page No.# 1/3
GAHC010118742022
THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)
Case No. : Cont.Cas(C)/346/2022
JAYANTA KR. RAY
S/O- SRI DHAN KR. RAY, R/O- VILL.- POKALAGI PT.-III, P.O. POKALAGI PT.III, P.S.- GOLAKGANJ, DIST. DHUBRI, ASSAM, PIN- 783335.
VERSUS
SMT. SURANJANA SENAPATI, ACS THE DIRECTOR OF ELEMENTARY EDUCATION, ASSAM, KAHILIPARA, GUWAHATI, PIN- 781019.
Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. P K DEKA
Advocate for the Respondent : MR. D SAIKIA
Page No.# 2/3
BEFORE
HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE MANASH RANJAN PATHAK
20/03/2023
Heard Mr. P K Deka, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. P K Bora, learned Standing counsel, Department of School (Elementary) Education for the sole respondent/contemnor.
Matter pertains to non-compliance of the order dated 06.10.2021 passed in WP(C) No. 5305/2021 regarding provincialisation of service of the petitioner under the provisions of the Assam Education (Provincialisation of Services of Teacher and Re-organization of Educational Institutions) Act, 2017.
During the deliberation of the matter, the Director of Elementary Education, Assam in compliance of the said order dated 06.10.2021 passed in WP(C) No. 5305/2021 placed a communication under No. EPD/H/174/2022/63 dated 26.07.2022 clarifying that the case of the petitioner was re-verified for consideration of provincialisation of his service under the provisions of the said 2017 Act and during such process of verification, the name of the petitioner did not appear in the DISE Verification Report of the National University of Educational Planning and Administration (NUEPA), New Delhi with regard to Bidyardabri Part-V Lower Primary School, wherein the petitioner claimed to have served as a Tutor.
On perusal of the relevant records after receiving the DISE Verification Report from the SSA, Assam, it is seen that only one person from the said Bidyardabri Part-V Lower Primary School could be recommended for provincialisation, i.e., Pratima Ray though the District Scrutiny Committee recommended the name of the petitioner along with said Pratima Ray.
During such DISE verification, it was found that the name of the petitioner did not appear in the DISE Data maintained by NUEPA, New Delhi up to the year 2011-2012 for which the name of the petitioner could not be considered and recommended for provincialisation of his service as per the said 2017 Act.
As such, though recommended by the District Scrutiny Committee for Elementary Education, Dhubri, the State Level Scrutiny could not recommend the petitioner for provincialisation of his service.
Page No.# 3/3
In view of the above, as the respondents have already complied with the order dated 06.10.2021 passed in WP(C) No. 5305/2021, there is no such contempt of Court on the part of the respondents in complying with the order dated 06.10.2021 passed in WP(C) No. 5305/2021.
Accordingly, this contempt petition, being devoid of merit, stands dismissed.
The notice of contempt issued upon the respondent/contemnor earlier on 24.06.2022 is hereby recalled.
The decision of the Director of Elementary Education, Assam dated 26.07.2022 be furnished to the petitioner for his necessary information.
JUDGE
Comparing Assistant
JAYANTA KR. RAY
SMT. SURANJANA SENAPATI, ACS THE DIRECTOR OF ELEMENTARY EDUCATION, ASSAM
MANASH RANJAN PATHAK
As recorded by the court registry
Proceedings for wilful disobedience of a court order under the Contempt of Courts Act 1971.
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
