Writ petition by dropped teachers seeking regularization of services in Assam was dismissed. The court held that relief could not be repetitious and statutory principles barring regularization without proof of lawful selection applied.
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.# 1/7
GAHC010130852017
THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)
Case No. : WP(C)/3329/2017
HIRA GOSWAMI and 10 ORS. W/O. SRI BHABA PRASAD GOSWAMI, R/O. RAJGARH ROAD, CHANDMARI, GUWAHATI-03, KAMRUPM.
2: SMT. CHAMPA DAS
W/O. TIKEN TALUKDAR VILL. JITKA P.O. PATHSALA DIST. BARPETA PIN-781325 ASSAM.
S/O. MOHIRUDDIN RAHMAN VILL. PAL P.O. BORPALLI DIST. BARPETA PIN-781314 ASSAM.
S/O. ABDUL MASJID VILL. P.O. SENGA DIST. BARPETA PIN-781305 ASSAM.
S/O. ABDUL GAFFUR KHAN VILL P.O. BHOGDIA
Page No.# 2/7
PIN-781303 ASSAM.
6: SMT. PRANITA BEGUM
W/O. ANOWAR HUSSAIN VILL. KUNDERGAON P.O. DAKSHIN GAON DIST. NALBARI PIN-781335 ASSAM.
7: MAHAMMAD ALI
S/O. HUSSAIN ALI R/O. VILL. MAJGAON P.O. MAJGAON PIN-781313 BARPETA ASSAM.
S/O. LT. HABIBAR RAHMAN R/O. WARD NO. 3 HOWLY TOWN P.O. HOWLY DIST. BARPETA PIN-781316 ASSAM.
9: MRINAL CHAKRABORTY
S/O. TANKESHWER CHAKRABORTY VILL. BHERUA P.O. DUNI DIST. SIPAJHAR PIN-784145.
10: RAJENDRA PRASAD SINGH
S/O. SHIVA NATH SINGH VILL. DHUNA GURI KUTUM P.O. MEDHISUTI DIST. LAKHIMPUR PIN-787055.
11: JANIUDDIN ALI AHMED
Page No.# 3/7
S/O. FARMAN ALI VILL. BILLESWAR P.O. BELSOR DIST. NALBARI PIN-781304
VERSUS
THE STATE OF ASSAM and 2 ORS.
REP. BY THE COMMISSIONER and SECRETARY TO THE GOVT. OF ASSAM, DEPTT. OF SECONDARY EDUCATION, DISPUR-06, ASSAM.
2:THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY TO THE GOVT. OF ASSAM
DEPTT. OF SECONDARY EDUCATION DISPUR GUWAHATI-06.
3:THE DIRECTOR OF SECONDARY EDUCATION KAHILIPARA GUWAHATI-2
Advocate for the Petitioner : MR.A CHOUDHURY
Advocate for the Respondent :
BEFORE
HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE KALYAN RAI SURANA
ORDER
Date : 13-03-2023
Heard Mr. D. Deka, learned counsel for the petitioners as well as Mr. U. Sarma, learned standing counsel for the Secondary Education Department for all the respondents.
Page No.# 4/7
Assam through its Education (Secondary) Department had regularized the service of 822 numbers of subject teachers in different junior colleges of Assam. It is projected that though similarly situated, the names of the petitioners were left out and accordingly, the petitioner nos.5 and 8 had approached this Court by filing WP(C) 6909/2005 along with other similarly situated persons and this Court by an order dated 21.12.2005 took note of the fact that the records reveal that the persons junior to the petitioners were regularized by ignoring the case of the petitioners and accordingly direction was issued to the respondent authorities to take necessary steps for regularizing the services of the petitioners from the date of receiving deficit grant-in-aid by the colleges and as per instructions/govt. circulars/notifications etc., and also service rule in vogue, without further delay by further directing that the entire exercise be carried out within a period of 4(four) months from the date of furnishing certified copy of the order.
Page No.# 5/7
Page No.# 6/7
Page No.# 7/7
recourse can be taken to have the salary and other emoluments of the petitioners, being funded by grant-in-aid. Hence, the Court is unable to accept the prayer made by the petitioners on the ground that appointment can only be made to the provincialized vacant posts as notified in respect of any govt. institutions. In light of decision of the Supreme Court of India in the case of Secretary, State of Karnataka and Ors. Vs. Umadevi, (2006) 4 SCC 1, the petitioners will have to demonstrate that they were engaged by following due process of selection in a manner recognized by law. In the present writ petition, the petitioners have not provided their initial appointment orders and they have not disclosed manner in which their appointments were made. Therefore, the Court is bound to follow the principle which have been laid down in the case of Uma Devi (supra) in respect of the prayer for regularization of service.
JUDGE
Comparing Assistant
3 issues framed by the court
Whether petitioners are entitled to regularization of services as teachers in provincialized schools.
Whether a repetitive writ petition is maintainable after similar relief was granted and not enforced.
Whether petitioners can bypass preliminary selection rules for regularization.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
3 provisions across 3 enactments
Hira Goswami
Champa Das
Sofior Rahman
Mahibur Rahman
Ismail Hussain Khan
Pranita Begum
Kalyan Rai Surana
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
