Disposed

Kanak Chandra Rabha v. the State of Assam and 4 Ors.

Gauhati HC17 Apr 2024WP(C)/349/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Court clarified that under Section 14 of the Act of 2017, the State Government is the appellate authority, not the Director of Elementary Education, and directed the petitioner to file a fresh appeal.

What did the court decide?

The petitioner is directed to file a fresh appeal before the Secretary to the Government of Assam, Department of School Education within 30 days.

Kanak Chandra Rabha Vs the State of Assam… — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Gauhati HC (2024)

¶1

Page No.# 1/4

¶2

GAHC010004072022

¶3

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

¶4

Case No. : WP(C)/349/2022

¶5

KANAK CHANDRA RABHA

¶6

HINDI TEACHER, MAKRI KALAGURU BISHNU PRASAD RABHA,M.E SCHOOL, (DISE CODE NO. 18030412602) BALIJANA EDUCATION BLOCK,GOALPARA, S/O LATE CHUPRAK RAM RABHA, RESIDENT OF GORAIMARI, PO DARIDURI, DIST GOALPARA, ASSAM 783101

¶7

VERSUS

¶8

THE STATE OF ASSAM AND 4 ORS

¶9

REPRSENTED BY THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY TO THE GOVT. OF ASSAM, ELEMENTARY EDUCATION DEPARTMENT, DISPUR GUWAHATI 06

¶10

2:THE DIRECTOR OF ELEMENTARY EDUCATION ASSAM CUM THE CHAIRMAN STATE LEVEL SCRUTINY COMMITTEE ASSAM KAHILIPARA GUWAHATI 19

¶11

3:THE DISTRICT SCRUTINY COMMITTEE FOR ELEMENTARY EDUCATION GOALPARA

¶12

REPRESENTED BY ITS CHAIRMAN GOALPARA ASSAM

¶13

4:THE DISTRICT ELEMENTARY EDUCATION OFFICER GOALPARA. ASSAM

¶14

5:THE BLOCK ELEMENTARY EDUCATION OFFICER

¶15

BALIJAN GOALPARA ASSA

¶16

Page No.# 2/4

¶17

Advocate for the Petitioner : MR J ISLAM

¶18

Advocate for the Respondent : SC. EDU.

¶19

BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE N. UNNI KRISHNAN NAIR

¶20

ORDER

¶21

Date : 18.04.2024

¶22

Heard Mr. J. Islam, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. P. Bora, learned Standing counsel, Elementary Education Department appearing on behalf of the respondent Nos. 1, 2, 3, 4 and 5.

¶23

As consented to by the learned counsel for the parties, the present writ petition is taken up for final consideration and disposal.

¶24

The petitioner by way of instituting the present proceedings has prayed for a direction upon the respondent authorities for provincializing his services as a language teacher/tutor in Makri Kalaguru Bishnu Prasad Rabha M.E. School. The petitioner herein was initially appointed as a Hindi Teacher by the Managing Committee of Makri Kalaguru Bishnu Prasad Rabha M.E. School on 01.03.1996 and he had joined his services in terms of the said order of appointment on 04.03.1996. At the time when the petitioner was so appointed in the said school, the school was in its venture stage. It is contended by the petitioner herein that the petitioner had received the financial assistance as provided by the Government to venture educational institutions from time to time. It is projected in the writ petition that upon enactment of the provisions of the Assam Education (Provincialization of Services of Teachers and Re-organization of Educational Institutions) Act, 2017 (for short “Act of 2017”), the case of the eligible serving teachers of the school in question including the petitioner herein

¶25

Page No.# 3/4

¶26

was considered by the District Scrutiny Committee and upon verification of the service particulars of the serving teachers in the said school, the District Scrutiny Committee proceeded to recommend the name of one Prabir Kumar Rabha (since deceased) against the post of language teacher. The name of the petitioner was recommended as an Additional Teacher in the said school. Thereafter, on further scrutiny being made in terms of the said Act of 2017, the services of Late Prabir Kumar Rabha along with two other serving teachers of the school in question came to be provincialized.

¶27

It is the specific case of the petitioner that before provincialization of his services, the Late Prabir Kumar Rabha had expired. Accordingly, the post of language teacher is lying vacant. The petitioner expressing his grievances had filed an appeal under Section 14 of the Act of 2017, on 15.12.2021 before the Director of Elementary Education, Assam.

¶28

On a perusal of the provisions of Section 14 of the said Act of 2017, it is revealed that against any recommendation made by the State Level Scrutiny Committee, it is the State Government in the concerned Administrative Department who shall be the Appellate Authority. In the case on hand, the services of the eligible teachers of the said school including that of Late Prabir Kumar Rabha came to be provincialized only after their cases were so recommended by the State Level Scrutiny Committee and accordingly, in terms of the provisions of Section 14 of the said Act of 2017, an appeal in the matter would lie before the State Government in the concerned Administrative Department and not before the Director of Elementary Education, Assam.

¶29

In view of the provisions of Section 14 of the said Act of 2017, the petitioner is hereby directed to submit a fresh appeal before the Secretary to the Government of Assam, Department of School Education highlighting his

¶30

Page No.# 4/4

¶31

grievances and staking a claim for provincialization of the services within a period of 30 (thirty) days from today along with a certified copy of this order. In the event, the petitioner submits an appeal within a period of 30 (thirty)days from today, the Secretary to the Government of Assam, Department of School Education shall consider the same strictly in accordance with the provisions of the Act of 2017.

¶32

The exercise now required to be carried out by the Appellate Authority shall be so initiated and concluded within a period of 3 (three) months from the date of receipt of the representation along with a certified copy of this order from the petitioner herein. On conclusion of the exercise as now required to be carried out, the Secretary to the Government of Assam, Department of School Education shall issue a Speaking Order and communicate the same to the petitioner herein.

¶33

With above observations and directions, the instant writ petition stands disposed of.

¶34

JUDGE

¶35

Comparing Assistant

Kanak Chandra Rabha v. the State of Assam and 4 Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Kanak Chandra Rabha 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

Foriz Uddin Laskar and Anr. Vs the State of Assam and 8 Ors.

Abdul Motin Vs the State of Assam and 8 Ors.

Jahid Alam Vs the State of Assam and 5 Ors.

Smti Ruplekha Lekharu Phukan Vs the State of Assam and 11 Ors.

Harekrishna Mahanta Vs the State of Assam and 3 Ors.

Rasikar Rahman Vs the State of Assam and 3 Ors.