Kabita Kachari and 16 Ors. Vs the State of Assam and 4 Ors.

¶1

Page No.# 1/8

¶2

GAHC010162312025

¶3

2025:GAU-AS:10081-DB

¶4

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

¶5

Case No. : WP(C)/4238/2025

¶6

1.KABITA KACHARI AND 16 ORS

¶7

W/O- DIMBESWAR KACHARI, RESIDENT OF LAYET NA CHUNGI GAON, PO- DIHINGIA, TITABOR, DIST- JORHAT, ASSAM-785630.

¶8

2: PRABIN DUTTA

¶9

SON OF NAMORAM DUTTA RESIDENT OF KAMARBANDHA TE ATAPAM GAON DIST- JORHAT ASSAM-785616.

¶10

3: POBITRA DUTTA

¶11

SON OF DEBEN DUTTA RESIDENT OF AMGURIKHAT POTIA GAON DAFALATING GRANT DIST- JORHAT ASSAM-785632.

¶12

4: REENA BORGOHAIN DAUGHTER OF MITRADHAR BORGOHAIN RESIDENT OF RAJABAHAR GOHAIN GAON P.S. BORHOLLA DIST- JORHAT ASSAM- 785631.

¶13

5: CHANDRAMA BORAH

¶14

DAUGHTER OF THOGESWAR BORAH RESIDENT OF ROWMARA DIST- JORHAT ASSAM PIN- 785104.

¶15

6: ABIDUR RAHMAN

¶16

SON OF TIPU SULTAN RESIDENT OF 2 NO. BEBEJIA GAON PO- TITABOR DIST- JORHAT ASSAM- 785630

¶17

7: BIJOY CHANDRA BORAH

¶18

SON OF SOBHARAM BORAH RESIDENT OF 190 MOUDOIJAN JANJIMUKH DHEKIA BHOROLUA GAON P.O.- TEOK DIST- JORHAT ASSAM PIN 785112

¶19

Page No.# 2/8

¶20

8: PRODIP CHANDRA BORA SON OF BHUDHAR BORA BAHEK GAON DIST- JORHAT ASSAM PIN- 785004.

¶21

9: GOJEN BORA

¶22

SON OF GHANESWAR BORA RESIDENT OF BYE PASS NH-37 CHARIGAON OIL P.S.-3 CHARIGAON KALAKHOWA GAON DIST- JORHAT ASSAM PIN 785010

¶23

10: PALLOB KUMAR GOGOI SON OF KANAK GOGOI RESIDENT OF SHANTIPUR TITABOR TITABOR DIST- JORHAT ASSAM PIN 785630

¶24

11: BABUL KUMAR NEOG

¶25

SON OF NARESWAR NEOG RESIDENT OF VILL- TEKELA GAON DIST- JORHAT ASSAM PIN 785616.

¶26

12: JAYANTA HAZARIKA

¶27

SON OF RAJEN HAZARIKA RESIDENT OF VILL- KUHAIARBORIA GAON BAHEK GAON DIST- JORHAT ASSAM PIN 785004

¶28

13: JAMUNA GOGOI

¶29

WIFE OF ANJAN KUMAR SAIKIA RESIDENT OF KARANGAKHAT HANDIQUE GAON JORHAT ASSAM PIN- 785009

¶30

14: TORUN KONWAR SON OF TULSHI NATH KONWAR RESIDENT OF CHANGMAI KONWAR GAON P.O.-CHARINGIA PUKHURI DIST-SIVSAGAR ASSAM PIN 785680

¶31

15: RUPAM GOHAIN SON OF MILESWAR GOHAIN RESIDENT OF TBN ROAD DARIKIAL GAON NAKACHARI GAON DIST- JORHAT ASSAM PIN 785635

¶32

16: ARUP CHETIA SON OF KHOGEN CHETIA RESIDENT OF VILL- PODUMONI CHETIA GAON LUKHURAKHAN GAON DIST- JORHAT ASSAM PIN 785636

¶33

Page No.# 3/8

¶34

17: BONTI BORAH

¶35

WIFE OF RAJIB KUMAR BORA RESIDENT OF VILL- GOHAIN TEKELA JORHAT EAST DIST- JORHAT ASSAM PIN 78500

¶36

-VERSUS-

¶37

1.THE STATE OF ASSAM AND 4 ORS

¶38

TO BE REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY TO THE GOVERNMENT OF ASSAM, SCHOOL EDUCATION (SECONDARY DEPARTMENT), DISPUR, GUWAHATI-6.

¶39

2:THE DIRECTOR SECONDARY EDUCATION

¶40

ASSAM KAHILIPARA GUWAHATI-19.

¶41

3:THE INSPECTOR OF SCHOOLS JORHAT DISTRICT CIRCLE DISTRICT- JORHAT ASSAM

¶42

4:THE DISTRICT SELECTION COMMITTEE FOR SELECTION AND PROMOTION OF HEADMASTERS IN JORHAT DISTRICT

¶43

TO BE REPRESENTED BY ITS DEPUTY COMMISSIONER CUM CHAIRMAN JORHAT DISTRICT DISTRICT- JORHAT ASSAM

¶44

5:THE STATE SELECTION BOARD FOR SELECTION OF HEADMASTER IN VARIOUS HIGH/HIGHER SECONDARY SCHOOL

¶45

TO BE REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY (SR.) SECONDARY EDUCATION DEPARTMENT-CUM-CHAIRMAN DISPUR GUWAHATI-6

¶46

For the Petitioner(s) : Mr. A.R. Bhuyan, Advocate.

¶47

: Mr. M.A. Mazarbhuiya, Advocate.

¶48

For the Respondent(s) : Mr. D. Saikia, Advocate General, Assam assisted by Mr. B. Kaushik, Standing Counsel, Education Department and Ms. R. Barua, Advocate.

¶49

– B E F O R E –

¶50

HON’BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR. ASHUTOSH KUMAR HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ARUN DEV CHOUDHURY

¶51

04.08.2025

¶52

(Ashutosh Kumar, CJ)

¶53

It may not be out of place here in this context to mention that initially the writ petition was listed before a learned Single Judge, but

¶54

Page No.# 4/8

¶55

considering the fact that Rule 14 of the Assam Secondary Education (Provincialised Schools) Service, Rules, 2018 (hereinafter called “Rules of 2018”) was under challenge, the matter was referred to the Division Bench.

¶56

2. We have heard Mr. A.R. Bhuyan, learned Advocate for the petitioners and Mr. D. Saikia, learned Advocate General, Assam assisted by Mr. B. Kaushik, learned Standing Counsel, Education Department and Ms. R. Barua, learned Advocate for the respondents.

¶57

3. The writ petitioners are Graduate Teachers in Arts, Science and Hindi subjects, who were initially appointed in their respective schools between the years 1991 and 2003. After they had rendered their services in nonprovincialised schools, their services were provincialised as Assistant Teachers in their respective schools since 01.01.2013. It was only thereafter that they were granted the Graduate scale of pay.

¶58

4. They had been, based on their performances and service records, entrusted with the responsibility of In-charge Headmaster in their respective schools, which was a kind of an additional responsibility by the Director of Secondary Education. While doing that, they were also entrusted with financial powers in their roles as In-charge Headmasters, which responsibility, they claim to have been discharging since the provincialisation of their services.

¶59

5. The Director of Secondary Education, Assam, however, vide letter dated 26.09.2023 had issued instruction to the respective Inspectors of Schools to fill up the vacant posts of the Principals and Headmasters of the provincialised Secondary Schools in accordance with Rule 14 of the Rules of 2018.

¶60

Page No.# 5/8

¶61

6. Based on that instruction, the Inspector of Schools, Jorhat District Circle, prepared a Gradation list dated 17.03.2025 for consideration of eligible candidates for the post of Headmaster.

¶62

7. The names of the writ petitioners were placed much below in the Gradation list for the reason of their services being counted from 01.01.2013, i.e. after provincialisation of their services and they being granted the Graduate pay-scale.

¶63

8. The writ petitioners contend that their seniority should have been calculated from the original date of joining, which dates back to the period between 1991 and 2003 and not doing so would be discriminatory and for no intelligible reason, would create a separate class of such teachers.

¶64

9. The Government of Assam, Secondary Education Department vide Notification dated 18.09.2019 came out with the Rules of 2018, framed under the powers conferred by the proviso to Article 309 of the Constitution of India.

¶65

The Rules, referred to above, have been made applicable to amongst others the teachers whose services were provincialized under the Assam Education (Provincialiation of Services of Teachers and Re-organization of Educational Institutions) Act, 2017 (hereinafter called “the Act o f 2017”).

¶66

10. Rule 14 of the Rules of 2018, referred to above, clearly specifies that the post of Headmaster for a High School and Superintendent of a High Madrassa shall be filled up by promotion from candidates amongst the Graduate Teachers as per District-wise seniority list on the recommendation of the District Selection Committee constituted under Rule 16(2). The selection of the Headmaster and Superintendent shall be based upon the seniority and

¶67

Page No.# 6/8

¶68

satisfactory Annual Confidential Report for the last 3(three) consecutive years as per the procedure provided under sub-rule (3).

¶69

11. The proviso to Rule 14 further clearly specifies that the seniority of the Graduate Teacher shall be determined from the date of receiving Graduate scale of pay to the respective Assistant Teacher.

¶70

12. The proviso to Rule 14(2) of the Rules of 2018 further provides that Graduate Teacher shall include the cadre of Assistant Headmaster for the purposes of selection to the post of Headmaster and the seniority of the Assistant Headmaster shall be counted from the date of joining as Graduate Teacher with Graduate scale of pay.

¶71

13. Rule 24 of the Rules of 2018 mandates that the seniority of a member in a cadre appointed by direct recruitment would be determined according to the order of preference in the respective select list finally approved under Rule 8(2) in respect of Post Graduate Teacher or Graduate Teacher, if he joins the appointment within 15 days from the date of receipt of the order of appointment or within the extended period as mentioned in Rule 19.

¶72

14. The last of the provisos in Rule 24 again clarifies that in case of Graduate Teachers, the seniority would be counted from the date of getting salaries meant for Graduate Teachers, and that in case of Contractual Teachers, the seniority shall be counted from the date of absorption in the sanctioned post carrying regular time scale of pay.

¶73

The seniority of the Headmaster of a ME/MV school, subsequently amalgamated with the Higher Secondary/Higher Schools, shall be counted from the date of getting pay in the Graduate scale of pay.

¶74

Page No.# 7/8

¶75

15. Thus, the Rules of 2018 clearly specify that the seniority shall be prepared only from the date when the Teachers start getting the Graduate scale of pay, which in the case of petitioners was only from 01.01.2013 when their services were provincialized under the Act of 2017.

¶76

16. The contention of Mr. Bhuyan, learned Advocate for the petitioners is that the Notification is hit by Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution of India for the reason of such distinction being arbitrary and the classification being without any rationale. No purpose is served in reckoning the seniority only from the date of provincialisation, for, it ignores the recognition of prior services rendered before provincialisation.

¶77

17. It has further been contended that the Gradation list prepared by the Inspector of Schools, Jorhat District Circle, is not sustainable in the eyes of law as it does not account for the actual length of service and fails to provide a fair basis for promotion.

¶78

18. The further grievance is that the Gradation list is absolutely flawed as it impinges unfavourably upon the promotional avenues of the petitioners.

¶79

19. All these grounds have been noted only to be rejected.

¶80

20. The services of the petitioners were provincialised on 01.01.2013 and only thereafter, they were put in the Graduate scale.

¶81

In exercise of the powers conferred under proviso to Article 309 of the Constitution of India, the Rules of 2018 have been framed, which clearly stipulates that the seniority shall be counted from the date when the Teachers start receiving the Graduate pay scale. The seniority list shall be prepared in accordance with that which will have a life span of 1(one) year.

¶82

Page No.# 8/8

¶83

21. Pursuant to such framing of Rules of 2018, efforts were made to fill up the vacant post of Headmasters in various schools and for that purpose the gradation/seniority list was prepared.

¶84

22. The petitioners’ name do appear in such seniority list prepared by the Inspector of Schools, Jorhat District Circle, but they are placed below for the reason of their services having been provincialised only from 01.01.2013.

¶85

23. The Rules have been properly framed with a specific provision for the seniority/gradation list.

¶86

24. Under such circumstances, the petitioners have not made out any case for interference in the Seniority/Gradation list prepared by the Inspector of Schools, Jorhat District Circle.

¶87

25. We do not find any reason to interfere with such seniority/gradation list of the petitioners.

¶88

26. The writ petition does not have merits and, is therefore, dismissed.

¶89

JUDGE CHIEF JUSTICE

¶90

Comparing Assistant

Kabita Kachari and 16 Ors. v. the State of Assam and 4 Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Kabita Kachari and 16 Ors. v. the State of Assam and 4 Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Eklavya Model Residential School. Vs the Union of India and 10 Ors.

Dimpi Borah Vs Suruj Gogoi and 4 Ors.

Ginati Deori Vs the State of Assam and 7 Ors.

Pawant Singh and Anr. Vs the State of Assam and 5 Ors.

Pauzantad Zeliang and 46 Ors. Vs the Union of India and 32 Ors.

Senovepe Song and 81 Ors. Vs the Union of India and 33 Ors.