Disposed

Dipak Chandra Nath and 5 Ors. v. the State of Assam and 3 Ors.

Gauhati HC4 Feb 2024WP(C)/463/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Teachers of Vidya Bharati Senior Secondary School sought provincialization under the Assam Act of 2017 despite their names not appearing in DISE data. Following a coordinate bench decision, the court directed the State Level Committee to scrutinize their recommendations without insisting on a DISE code.

What did the court decide?

Direction to consider petitioners' provincialization via State Level Committee scrutiny under Section 13(10)/(11) without insisting on DISE code, completed within six months with a speaking order.

Dipak Chandra Nath and 5 Ors. Vs the State of Assam… — Education and Admissions | Gauhati HC (2024)

¶1

Page No.# 1/7

¶2

GAHC010016262024

¶3

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

¶4

Case No. : WP(C)/463/2024

¶5

DIPAK CHANDRA NATH AND 5 ORS

¶6

S/O SRI MAHESH CHANDRA NATH, R/O RANGIYA WARD NO. 5, NEAR B.ED COLLEGE, DIST-KAMRUP, ASSAM, PIN-781354

¶7

2: SMTI KALYANI DEKA W/O SRI AJIT SALOI R/O VILL- SINGARPARA P.O.-KENDUA DIST-KAMRUP ASSAM PIN-781121

¶8

3: HATIMUDDIN AHMED S/O LATE M. ALI R/O TIPKURI P.S.-RANGIYA DIST- KAMRUP ASSAM PIN-781334

¶9

4: SMTI DIPAMONI CHOUDHURY W/O SRI RAJ BARUA R/O NICHILAMARI P.O.-ORANG DIST- UDALGURI ASSAM PIN-784114

¶10

5: JAGADISH BHUYAN S/O SRI SHANTIRAM BHUYAN R/O CHEYAPARA PATHURIGHAT ASSAM PIN-784144

¶11

Page No.# 2/7

¶12

6: SMTI JYOTIKA DEKA W/O DR. RATUL PATOWARY R/O WEST JALUKBARI (LANKESWAR) NAMGHAR PATH P.O.-GAUHATI UNIVERSITY DIST-KAMRUP ASSAM PIN-78101

¶13

VERSUS

¶14

THE STATE OF ASSAM AND 3 ORS REPRESENTED BY THE COMMISSIONER AND SECRETARY TO THE GOVERNMENT OF ASSAM, SECONDARY EDUCATION DEPARTMENT, DISPUR, GUWAHATI-781006

¶15

2:THE DIRECTOR TO THE GOVERNMENT OF ASSAM SECONDARY EDUCATION DEPARTMENT KAHILIPARA GUWAHATI-781019

¶16

3:THE INSPECTOR OF SCHOOLS KAMRUP DISTRICT CIRCLE KAMRUP ASSAM

¶17

4:THE PRINCIPAL VIDYA BHARATI SENIOR SECONDARY SCHOOL SINGERPARA DIST-KAMRUP ASSAM PIN-78112

¶18

Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. J PATOWARY

¶19

Advocate for the Respondent : SC, SEC. EDU.

¶20

Page No.# 3/7

¶21

BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE N. UNNI KRISHNAN NAIR

¶22

ORDER

¶23

Date : 05.02.2024

¶24

Heard Mr. J. Patowary, learned counsel for the petitioners. Also heard Mr. S. M. T. Chistie, learned standing counsel, Education (Secondary) Department, representing all the respondents.

¶25

2. The petitioners, by way of the present proceeding, have raised their grievances with regard to the non-consideration of the recommendations made in their respective cases by the jurisdictional District Scrutiny Committee for provincialization of their services as Teachers/Tutors in their respective subjects in Vidya Bharati Senior Secondary School, Kamrup on the ground that the names of the petitioners were not found captured in the DISE data, purportedly maintained for the Vidya Bharati Senior Secondary School.

¶26

3. The petitioners were all initially appointed as Lecturers in Vidya Bharati Senior Secondary School, Kamrup. The petitioner no. 1 was appointed as a Lecturer in the Department of Economics on 03.08.2020. The petitioner no. 2 was so appointed as a Lecturer in the Department of Philosophy on 01.10.2001. The petitioner no. 3 was so appointed as a Lecturer in the Department of Political Science on 01.08.2002. Similarly, the petitioner no. 4 was appointed as a Lecturer in the Department of English on 14.10.2003. The petitioner no. 5 was appointed as a Lecturer in

¶27

Page No.# 4/7

¶28

the Department of History on 18.11.2004 and the petitioner no. 6 was appointed as a Lecturer in the Department of Assamese on 01.04.2010.

¶29

4. The petitioners contend that the cases of eligible teachers of Vidya Bharati Senior Secondary School, Kamrup, including that of the petitioners, were taken up for consideration for provincialization under the provisions of the Assam Education (Provincialization of Services of Teachers and Reorganization of Educational Institutions) Act, 2017 (in short “Act of 2017”) and on conclusion of the process, while services of other similarly situated teachers working in the school came to be provincialized, the cases of the petitioners for such provincialization were not considered favorably although the District Scrutiny Committee had recommended their cases for such provincialisation as Teachers/Tutors.

¶30

5. It is the case of the petitioners that the respondent authorities have refused to consider their cases for provincialization only on the ground that their name did not figure in the DISE data stated to be available for the School in question.

¶31

The provision of the Act of 2017 requires the particulars of a School to be captured in the DISE data and a DISE code is required only in case of a Venture Lower Primary School or Upper Primary School, whereas such requirement is not mentioned for a Venture Higher/Senior Secondary School. However, the respondents have not considered the case of the petitioners as their names, purportedly did not figure in the DISE data.

¶32

Page No.# 5/7

¶33

6. A Coordinate Bench of this Court in WP(C)1353/2022 (Kishor Kumar Nath & Ors. -Vs- The State of Assam & Ors.) and other connected writ petitions, vide judgment & order dated 12.04.2023, had dealt with the said issue and concluded as follows:-

¶34

“16. Therefore, a conjoint reading of the provisions referred to hereinabove in respect to the Act of 2017 there is no requirement for the names of the teachers working in the ‘Venture High School’ as well as ‘Venture Higher Secondary School’ as defined in Section 2(x) and 2(y) of the Act of 2017 to have their names captured in the DISE Code as is otherwise required in the case of a teachers/tutors whose services are to be provincialised in respect of ‘Venture ME School’ and ‘Venture Lower Primary School’ as well as ‘Venture Upper Primary School’ as defined in Sections 2(za), 2(zb) and 2(zc) of the Act of 2017 wherein the names of such teachers or tutors are required to be captured in the DISE Code up to 2009-10.

¶35

In the backdrop of the above, let this Court take into consideration the case of the petitioners before this Court in the present batch of writ petitions. The learned counsel for the petitioners has submitted that the concerned respondent authorities have not processed the proposals for provincialisation of the services of the petitioners who are working in ‘Venture High Schools’ and ‘Venture Higher Secondary Schools’ on the ground that the petitioners’ names are not captured in the DISE Code. It is also the case of the petitioners that the concerned authorities have issued communication not to process such proposals of provincialisation of services of teachers/tutors whose names have not been captured in the DISE Code.

¶36

This Court, on the basis of the above analysis of the provisions of the Act of 2017, is of the opinion that the insistence of the respondent authorities of the names of petitioners who have been rendering services in ‘Venture High School’ and ‘Venture Higher Secondary School’ to be captured in the DISE Code of 2009-

¶37

Page No.# 6/7

¶38

10 is contrary to the Act of 2017 as it is not the mandate of the Act of 2017 to fulfill such requirement in respect to such teachers and/or tutors working in ‘Venture High School’ and ‘Venture Higher Secondary School’ to have their names captured in the DISE Code upto 2009-10. Such insistence is arbitrary and contrary to the provisions of the Act of 2017 and accordingly interfered with.”

¶39

7. In view of the said position, this writ petition stands disposed of with a direction to the respondent authorities, more particularly, the Director of Secondary Education, Assam to consider the case of the petitioners for provincialisation of their services as Teachers/Tutors by having the recommendation made in case of the petitioners by the jurisdictional District Scrutiny Committee scrutinized by the State Level Committee in terms of the provisions of Section 13(10).

¶40

It is provided that the State Level Committee in terms of Section 13(11) shall be at liberty to carry out physical verification of the institution of the petitioner and call for such other record and documents as may be required for the purpose of verification of particular of the petitioners and also to examine as to whether the petitioners were in continuous service since the dates of their initial appointment. After verification of all such documents and records that may be produced before it, also carrying out of physical verification of the institution, the State Level Committee shall come to a conclusion with regard to the recommendation made by the District Scrutiny Committee in favor of the petitioners for provincialisation of their services against the post of Lecturers in their respective Departments in Vidya Bharati Senior Secondary School, Kamrup.

¶41

Page No.# 7/7

¶42

8. The State Level Committee or any other authority shall not insist upon the petitioners for producing a DISE code of the year 2009-10, or prior thereto, or thereafter.

¶43

9. The above exercise shall be completed within a period of 6(six) months from the date a certified copy is placed before the Director of Secondary Education, Assam.

¶44

10. The decision that would be arrived at in the matter shall be communicated to the petitioners in the form of a speaking order.

¶45

The writ petition accordingly stands disposed of.

¶46

Comparing Assistant

Dipak Chandra Nath and 5 Ors. v. the State of Assam and 3 Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Dipak Chandra Nath and 5 Ors. v. the State of Assam and 3 Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Mafidul Islam Hazarika and 7 Ors. Vs the State of Assam and 2 Ors.

Hemanta Das Vs Tez Prasad Bhusal, IAS and Anr.

Kiran Kumar Chakraborty Vs the State of Assam and 2 Ors.

Iswar Prashad Borah Vs the State of Assam and 3 Ors.

Abdul Baten Ahmed and 2 Ors. Vs the State of Assam and 3 Ors.

Abbas Ali Ahmed, Vs the State of Assam and 3 Ors.