Dismissed

Smti. Tila Maya Sonary v. the State of Assam and 6 Ors.

Gauhati HC3 Mar 2023WP(C)/5414/2016

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This single-judge order dismissed a writ petition by a former teacher challenging the termination of her service as a Stipendiary Mistress. The court distinguished it from a Division Bench order covering Assistant Teachers and quashed the claim due to the non-existence of the stipendiary mistress post under relevant rules. Complaints dismissed.

What the court decided

AI extract

Smti. Tila Maya Sonary Vs the State of Assam… — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Gauhati HC (2023)

¶1

Page No.# 1/4

¶2

GAHC010024602016

¶3

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

¶4

Case No. : WP(C)/5414/2016

¶5

SMTI. TILA MAYA SONARY D/O- SRI LAL BAHADUR SONARY, R/O VILL. and P.O.- DIHIRA, P.S.BARBARI, DIST.- BAKSA, BTAD, ASSAM.

¶6

VERSUS

¶7

THE STATE OF ASSAM AND 6 ORS REP. BY THE COMMISSIONER and SECY. TO THE GOVT. OF ASSAM, EDUCATION DEPTT., DISPUR, GHY- 6, DIST.- KAMRUP M, ASSAM.

¶8

2:THE SECRETARY BTC KOKRAJHAR BTAD ASSAM PIN- 781374.

¶9

3:THE DIRECTOR OF EDUCATION BODOLAND TERRITORIAL COUNCIL KOKRAJHAR BTAD ASSAM PIN- 781374.

¶10

4:THE DIST. ELEMENTARY EDUCATION OFFICER MUSHALPUR DIST.- BAKSA BTAD ASSAM PIN- 781372.

¶11

5:THE BLOCK ELEMENTARY EDUCATION OFFICER

¶12

Page No.# 2/4

¶13

MUSHALPUR DIST.- BAKSA BTAD ASSAM PIN- 781372. 6:THE DIST. ELEMENTARY EDUCATION OFFICER NALBARI DIST.- NALBARI ASSAM. 7:THE DY. INSPECTOR OF SCHOOLS NALBARI DIST.- NALBARI ASSAM

¶14

Advocate for the Petitioner : MR A N AHMED

¶15

Advocate for the Respondent :

¶16

BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MANASH RANJAN PATHAK

¶17

ORDER

¶18

03.03.2023

¶19

Heard Mr. A N Ahmed, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. P N Sarma, learned Standing counsel, Department of School Education for the respondent Nos. 1, 6 & 7. Also heard Ms. R B Borah, learned Standing counsel, BTC for the respondent Nos. 2 to 5.

¶20

2. It is submitted by the petitioner that the Deputy Inspector (DI) of Schools, Nalbari vide order under Memo No. Apptt-1/99/1466-72 dated 04.12.1999 appointed her as Stipendiary Mistress against the converted post sanctioned by the Government on 16.11.1991 and posted her at Bijuli Sonapur Lower Primary School under the SubInspector of Schools, Mushalpur Circle, District-Baksa.

¶21

3. By an order dated 19.01.2009, the Director of Education, BTC terminated her service with immediate effect finding her appointment doubtful and as she could not fulfill the terms and conditions, like (a) the Advertisement issued by the DEEO, D.I. of Schools of Nalbari inviting application as a candidates to fill up the posts in the schools in the BTC

¶22

Page No.# 3/4

¶23

area, (b) Approval of the State Level Empowered Committee of the Personal Department of Government of Assam to fill up the posts, (c) the records of holding interview and preparation of score sheets by the interview board, (d) list of selected candidates indicating vacancies of the schools to fill up the selected candidates and (e) Approval of erstwhile Bodoland Autonomous Council for the appointment.

¶24

4. Petitioner submitted that the cases of similarly placed teachers have been considered by the Hon’ble Division Bench of this Court by common order dated 06.02.2015 passed in Writ Appeal No. 182/2013 (Gobinda Barman and 4 Ors. -Vs- the State of Assam and 6 Ors.) and other connected cases.

¶25

5. It is also submitted by the petitioner that following the order of the Hon’ble Division Bench of this Court passed in Writ Appeal No. 182/2013 and other connected cases, a Coordinate Bench of this Court have allowed the cases of the petitioners serving as Assistant Teachers in BTC areas, whose services were terminated like the petitioner.

¶26

6. To that extent, the petitioner has annexed copy of the orders of this Court passed in WP(C) No. 1910/2015 as well as WP(C) No. 1014/2014, disposed of on 06.04.2015 and 21.05.2015 respectively.

¶27

7. Ms. Borah, Standing counsel, BTC on instruction submitted that since 2009, the petitioner is no longer in service nor she is rendering any service in the said school after her such termination.

¶28

8. From the orders passed by the Court, annexed by the petitioner it is seen that that those orders have been passed in the cases of Assistant Teachers serving in the BTC areas.

¶29

9. But in the case in hand, the petitioner claimed that she was appointed as Stipendiary Mistress.

¶30

10. The provisions of Assam Elementary Education (Provincialisation) Act, 1974 and the Assam Elementary Education (Provincialisation) Rules, 1977, does not provide for any such post of Stipendiary Mistress in any provincialised schools of the State.

¶31

11. The petitioner has also not annexed copy of her appointment order issued by the Deputy Inspector of Schools, Nalbari, except a photocopy of her Service Book having signatures of the Sub-Inspector of Schools, Mushalpur Circle dated 12.05 and the Block

¶32

Page No.# 4/4

¶33

Elementary Education Officer, Baksa, Mushalpur dated 28.05 without specifying the relevant year of those signatures in the service book.

¶34

12. Since the petitioner has failed to establish her case regarding her appointment as Stipendiary Mistress and there is no such post of Stipendiary Mistress under the provisions of said 1977 Rules, noted above and since the cases covered by the order of the Hon’ble Division Bench dated 06.02.2015 passed in Writ Appeal No. 182/2013 and other connected cases relates to only Assistant Teachers, as such, this writ petition being devoid of any merit, stands dismissed.

¶35

JUDGE

¶36

Comparing Assistant

Smti. Tila Maya Sonary v. the State of Assam and 6 Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What the court decided

Smti. Tila Maya Sonary v. the State of Assam and 6 Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Mrs. Rupa Rani Devi Vs the State of Assam and 5 Ors.

Smt. Rupali Chetia Phukan Vs the State of Assam and 4 Ors.

Smti. Padumi Barman Vs the State of Assam and 3 Ors.

Union of India and 7 Ors. Vs Geep Industries (India) Pvt. Ltd.

Bacchu Deb Nath Vs the State of Assam and 8 Ors.

Dali Devi Vs the State of Assam and 7 Ors.