Md. Riyajul Islam and 2 Ors. Vs the State of Assam and 8 Ors.

¶1

Page No.# 1/18

GAHC010144122022

2025:GAU-AS:9108-

DB

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

¶6

Case No. : WP(C)/4850/2022

¶7

MD. RIYAJUL ISLAM AND 2 ORS

¶8

S/O LATE IDRISH ALI, SCIENCE GRADUATE ASSISTANT TEACHER, DATE OF JOINING- 06.05.2013, BDS GOVT. HIGHER SECONDARY SCHOOL FOR HEARING IMPAIRED, MA, B.SC(HONS), B.ED (HI), ISLT, DCA, R/O QUARTER NO. 2, SCHOOL CAMPUS, KAHILIPARA, GUWAHATI, ASSAM, PIN- 781019.

¶9

2: LAKSHI KANTA BHARALI S/O LATE KAYA RAM BHARALI GRADUATE ASSISTANT TEACHER JORHAT BLIND INSTITUTE BA SPECIAL B.ED DOJ- 17.09.1996 NA ALI JORHAT DIST. JORHAT ASSAM PIN- 781501 R/O- VILL. SUAGPUR PO BHOGPUR PS GORESWAR DIST. BAKSA ASSAM PIN- 781364.

¶10

3: SMTI. PAPORI BORAH D/O- KANOK BORAH B.SC. MA (MSW) B.ED DHLS ISL (TRAINING)

¶11

Page No.# 2/18

¶12

SCIENCE GRADUATE ASSISTANT TEACHER DOJ- 07.05.2013 SCHOOL FOR HEARING IMPAIRED JORHAT R/O- NA-ALI MG ROAD JORHAT ASSAM PIN- 785001. THE PETITIONERS NO. 2 AND 3 HAVE COMMON ADDRESS OF CORRESPONDENCE C/O- RIYAJUL ISLAM QUARTER NO. 2 SCHOOL CAMPUS BDS GOVT. HIGHER SECONDARY SCHOOL FOR HEARING IMPAIRED KAHILIPARA GUWAHATI ASSAM PIN- 781019

¶13

VERSUS

¶14

THE STATE OF ASSAM AND 8 ORS

¶15

REPRESENTED BY THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY TO THE GOVT. OF ASSAM, SOCIAL WELFARE DEPARTMENT, (NEWLY NAMED AS DEPARTMENT OF SOCIAL JUSTICE AND EMPOWERMENT SECTOR), DISPUR, GUWAHATI-6.

¶16

2:THE DIRECTOR OF SOCIAL WELFARE (NEWLY NAMED AS DIRECTORATE OF SOCIAL JUSTICE AND EMPOWERMENT SECTOR) ASSAM UZAN BAZAAR ASSAM PIN- 781001.

¶17

3:THE UNION OF INDIA

¶18

TO BE REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY TO THE GOVT. OF INDIA MINISTRY OF SOCIAL JUSTICE AND EMPOWERMENT SHASTRI BHAWAN C-WING DR. RAJENDRA PRASAD ROAD NEW DELHI- 110011.

¶19

4:THE REHABILITATION COUNCIL OF INDIA

¶20

TO BE REPRESENTED BY ITS MEMBER SECRETARY AND SECRETARY BOARD OF EXAMINATION IN REHABILITATION B-22 QUTUB INSTITUTIONAL AREA NEW DELHI- 110016.

¶21

5:THE CHIEF COMMISSIONER FOR PERSONS WITH DISABILITIES

¶22

Page No.# 3/18

¶23

TO BE REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY ROOM NO. 524(B-III) 5TH FLOOR PANDIT DEENDAYAL ANTYODAYA BHAWAN CGO COMPLEX LODHI ROAD NEW DELHI PIN- 110003. 6:THE COMMISSIONER FOR PERSONS WITH DISABILITIES ASSAM LATAKATA BASISTHA GUWAHATI ASSAM PIN- 781029. 7:THE COMMISSIONER AND SECRETARY TO THE GOVT. OF ASSAM DEPARTMENT OF FINANCE ASSAM CIVIL SECRETARIAT DISPUR GUWAHATI ASSAM PIN- 781006. 8:THE COMMISSIONER AND SECRETARY TO THE GOVT. OF ASSAM DEPARTMENT OF PERSONNEL (B) ASSAM CIVIL SECRETARIAT DISPUR GUWAHATI ASSAM PIN- 781006. 9:THE ASSAM PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION TO BE REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY ASSAM PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION KHANAPARA GUWAHATI ASSAM PIN- 781022

¶24

Advocate for the petitioners : Mr. B. Purkayastha. Advocates for the respondents : Ms. R. Deka (for R-1, 2 & 6), Ms. R. Devi, CGC (for R-3, 4 & 5);

¶25

Page No.# 4/18

¶26

Ms. R.M. Barooah (for R-7) Mr. D. Nath, Sr. Govt. Adv. (for R-8).

¶27

Date of hearing	: 25.04.2025
Date of judgment	: 15.07.2025

¶28

BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ROBIN PHUKAN

¶29

JUDGMENT & ORDER (CAV)

¶30

Heard Mr. B. Purkayastha, learned counsel for the petitioners. Also heard Ms. R. Deka, learned counsel for the respondent Nos. 1, 2 and 6; Ms. R. Devi, learned CGC for the respondent Nos. 3, 4 and 5; Ms. R.M. Barooah, learned counsel for the respondent No. 7; and Mr. D. Nath, learned Senior Government Advocate for the respondent No. 8.

¶31

2. In this petition, under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, three petitioners, namely, (i) Md. Riyajul Islam, Science Graduate Assistant Teacher of BDS Government Higher Secondary School for Hearing Impaired, Guwahati; (ii) Sri Lakshi Kanta Bharali, Graduate Assistant Teacher of Jorhat Blind Institution, Jorhat; and (iii) Smti. Papori Borah, Science Graduate Assistant Teacher of School for Hearing Impaired, Jorhat, have prayed for:-

¶32

(i) setting aside and quashing and/or modifying the provisions of the Assam Social Welfare (Recruitment and Promotion) Service Order, 1994 as amended in the year 2013 (‘Order of 1994’, for short) (Annexure-5A & 5B) to the extent of its repugnancy with that of Rehabilitation Council Act, 1992 and Right of Persons with Disabilities Act, 2016 and the rules/regulations/notifications framed

¶33

Page No.# 5/18

¶34

there under;

¶35

(ii) setting aside and quash the order dated 10.08.2020 (Annexure-4B) issued by the respondent No. 1; and

¶36

(iii) to direct the respondent Nos. 1 & 2 to amend and/or modify the provisions of the Assam Social Welfare (Recruitment and Promotion) Service Order, 1994 in the light of the mandates of the Rehabilitation Council of India Act, 1992 and the Rights of Persons with Disabilities Act, 2016 and rules/regulations/notifications framed there under;

¶37

(iv) to direct the State respondents to fill up the posts of Principals in respect of all the Government Special Schools viz. BDS Government Higher Secondary School for Hearing Impaired, Guwahati, Jorhat Blind Institution, School for Hearing Impaired, Jorhat as per the mandates of the circular dated 11.01.2012 (Annexure-10B) issued by the RCI; and

¶38

(v) further, to direct the State respondents, more particularly the respondent Nos. 1 and 2, to consider the case of promotion of the petitioners to the post of Principal of respective Special Schools, as they are the eligible and senior among others of their respective schools as per the mandates of the RCI Rules/Regulations etc. within a specified time.

¶39

3. The background facts, leading to filing of the present petition, are briefly stated as under:

¶40

“The petitioners herein are working as Science Graduate Assistant Teacher of BDS Government Higher Secondary School for Hearing Impaired, Guwahati; Graduate Assistant Teacher of Jorhat Blind

¶41

Page No.# 6/18

¶42

Institution, Jorhat; and Science Graduate Assistant Teacher of School for Hearing Impaired, Jorhat, and they have applied to the post of Principal of Special Schools of the Government of Assam viz. BDS Government Higher Secondary School for Hearing Impaired, Guwahati; Jorhat Blind Institution, Jorhat; and School for Hearing Impaired, Jorhat. But, the respondents in the Social Justice and Empowerment Department had denied promotions to them on the ground that the Assam Social Welfare (Recruitment and Promotion) Service Order, 1994, as amended in the year 2013, do not provide for any such provisions/scope to the incumbents to the cadre posts of Assistant Graduate teachers to be considered for promotions to the posts of Principals/Vice Principals of Special Schools. The pleaded case of the petitioners is that the order dated 10.08.2020, itself makes it clear that the decision of the Government is violative of Article 154 of the Constitution of India, as the Government of Assam is duty bound to implement the provisions of the mandates of the Rehabilitation Council of India Act, 1992, the Right of Persons with Disabilities Act, 2016, and the rules/regulations/notifications issued under the provisions of the Central legislations. It is also the pleaded case of the petitioners that the Circular dated 11.01.2012, issued by the Rehabilitation Council of India (RCI) clearly provides the minimum qualifications and experience required for filling up the posts of Principals of Special Schools, but the respondents in the State of Assam cannot ignore the mandate of RCI and Chief Commissioner of Persons with Disabilities, and besides, Hon’ble Supreme Court in its order dated 18.10.2021, passed in WP(C) No. 132/2016 had also directed the State respondents to implement

¶43

Page No.# 7/18

¶44

the mandates of the above two legislations. The further pleaded case of the petitioners is that they are eligible senior Special Graduate Assistant Teachers of the above referred three Special Schools of Government of Assam and they possess the requisite qualifications and experience as per mandate of the RCI and as such, the State respondents cannot deny them from being promoted to the post of Principal of their respective schools, and if necessary, by amending the impugned Service Order of 1994 framed by the Government of Assam and thereby, violated the direction of the Hon’ble Supreme Court and also violated the rights of the school going special students who are otherwise differently abled persons of the society and deserve special attention from the State respondents.”

¶45

4. The respondent No.2/Director of Social Welfare has filed affidavit-inopposition, wherein a stand has been taken that the Government in Social Welfare Department, vide Notification SWD.293/2004/49, dated 30.09.2013, formulated the Assam Social Welfare (Recruitment and Promotion) (Amendment) Service Order, 1994, for appointing in CDPO and Allied Cadre, wherein a provision had been made that 60% posts shall be filled up by way of direct recruitment through APSC and 40% post shall be filled up by way of promotion from the Assistant Child Development Project Officer (ACDPOY Supervisors/Assistant Superintendent Home and allied cadres/Statistical Assistant Field Investigator/Ministerial Staff of Directorate), but, no provision has been made from the candidates of Graduate Teacher, and that the letter dated 01.02.2020, was written by the Joint Secretary, Social Welfare Department to Assam Public Service Commission (APSC) for filling up post of Vice Principal (Class-II Cadre), Jorhat Blind Institute, Jorhat through direct

¶46

Page No.# 8/18

¶47

recruitment by APSC and not through process of promotion as claimed by the petitioners.

¶48

4.1. It is also stated that there are two posts which were created in the Special Schools i.e. BDS Govt. Higher Secondary School for Hearing Impaired, Kahilipara and Jorhat Blind Institution, Jorhat, under the Social Welfare Department (presently known as Department of Social Justice & Empowerment), namely, Graduate Teacher (Science) and Graduate Teacher (Arts), but, no post is there as mentioned in the writ petition by the petitioners i.e. Science Graduate Assistant Teacher, and that the posts as mentioned in the Executive Order for Regulating (Recruitment and Promotion) to the Assam Social Welfare Service, vide SWD (5)/74/P1/83, dated 01.08.1994, was created a long time ago (in the year 1960-70 and onwards), but the Rehabilitation Council of India has developed the guidelines for minimum requirement of RCI approved qualification for appointment of Special Education Teachers, vide No. 7-91/RCI2011, dated 11.01.2012, and as per the Executive Order for Regulating (Recruitment and Promotion) to the Assam Social Welfare Service, vide SWD(5)/74/PU83, dated 01.08.1994, the petitioners do not have requisite qualification for promotion to the post of Vice Principal as well as Principal in Special Schools, namely, BDS Govt. Higher Secondary School for Hearing Impaired, Kahilipara and Jorhat Blind Institution, Jorhat under Social Justice and Empowerment Department.

¶49

5. The respondent Nos. 3 and 4 have also filed affidavit-in-opposition, wherein it is stated that the prayer being made by the petitioners in this writ petition is for consideration of their case for promotion to the post of Principal in respective Special Schools and the petitioners have also prayed that they are eligible and seniors among their respective schools as per the mandates of the

¶50

Page No.# 9/18

¶51

RCI rules/regulations etc, and that the promotion to the posts of Principals/Vice Principals do not come under the purview of the answering respondent, however, RCI governs the minimum qualification for a registered personnel/professional to work in the field of disability rehabilitation and special education, and that further, the RCI has developed and issued the Model Recruitments Rules/Guidelines for the category of professional and personnel for level of appointment along with qualification.

¶52

6. The petitioners herein have filed their affidavit-in-reply to the affidavitin-opposition filed by the respondent No. 2, wherein it is stated that the impugned Notification No.SWD.293/2004/49, dated 30.09.2013, is being challenged on the ground that said notification is not in conformity with the mandates of the Constitution of India and as such, the said notification cannot be acted upon as it violates the mandates of the Central Legislation i.e. RCI Act, 1992 and PWD Act, 2016.

¶53

6.1. It is also stated that the Graduate Teacher are the feeder cadre posts for promotion to the posts of Vice Principal and Principal of Special Schools as per the mandates of the RCI Act, 1992, and that the claim of the petitioners is confined to the post of Principal only and not to the post of Vice Principal, and both the posts are to be filled up following the mandates of the Hon'ble Supreme Court as well as the provisions of the RCI Act, 1992 and PWD Act, 2016, and the State of Assam cannot adopt any other means for filling up the posts of Vice Principal and Principal of a Special School by violating the mandates of the Constitution of India, RCI Act, PWD Act and the mandates of the Hon'ble Supreme Court, therefore, the letter issued on 01.02.2020, is bad in law.

¶54

6.2. It is also stated that the Graduate Teachers of Special High Schools are

¶55

Page No.# 10/18

¶56

equivalent to the status and rank of Graduate Assistant teachers of general Higher Secondary Schools, and presently, there are two types of teachers in Higher Secondary Schools, i.e., the Teachers who are teaching in the High Schools are termed as TGT i.e. Trained Graduate Teacher, and those who are teaching in Higher Secondary Schools are termed as PGT i.e. Post Graduate Teacher, and as such, the authorities of the Department are required to amend the nomenclatures of the post as per the need of the time, and in conformity with the RCI Act, 1992 and PWD Act, 2016, but the State of Assam has to amend the old service rules/orders.

¶57

7. In respect to the affidavit-in-opposition, so filed by the respondent Nos. 3 and 4, the petitioners had filed their reply, wherein it is stated that the Special Schools are being run by the Government of Assam up to the level of Higher Secondary, but these institutions are not having RCI recognition as on date and in any kind of institute, the post of head of the institute is to be filled up from amongst the eligible and qualified teachers/professors, who have gathered experience and knowledge in the respective field, and that the Ministry of Social Justice and Empowerment, through its Department of Empowerment of Persons with Disabilities had published the model guidelines i.e. with the approval of RCI, which provides the minimum qualification for different categories of post of the institutes, which are providing special education through special institution, and the said Central guidelines are binding upon the State authorities for running the special educational institutions, and the guidelines published by the Central Government with approval of the RCI, provides that teachers rendering education to special children having RCI approved qualification, would be entitled to be appointed/promoted to the post of Principal of special educational institution and as such, the provision of Assam Social Welfare (Recruitment and

¶58

Page No.# 11/18

¶59

Promotion) Service Order, 1994, as amended in the year 2013, is required to be modified and/or amended to the extent to exclude the more than one manner of filling up of the post of Principal/Vice Principal of special educational institutions.

¶60

8. Mr. Purkayastha, learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the Assam Social Welfare (Recruitment and Promotion) Service Order, 1994, as amended in the year 2013, vide Annexure-5A and 5B, do not provide any provision/scope to the present petitioners in the cadre of the post of Assistant Graduate Teachers to be considered to the post of Principal/Vice Principal of the Special Schools. Mr. Purkayastha also submits that the impugned order dated 10.08.2020 (Annexure-4B), itself indicates that the decision of Government is violative of Article 154 of the Constitution of India as it is repugnant to the direction issued by the Rehabilitation Council of India under the Rehabilitation Council of India Act, 2016, and the rules/regulations/notifications issued under the provision of the said Central legislation, and it is clearly mandated in the circular dated 11.01.2012, issued by the RCI, that the minimum educational qualification and experience for filling up the post of Principal of Special Schools, and that the State of Assam has no discretion, but to comply with the mandate of RCI and the direction issued by the Chief Commissioner for Persons with Disabilities.

¶61

8.1. Mr. Purkayastha also submits that in WP(C) No. 132/2016, Hon’ble Supreme Court in its order dated 18.10.2021, has also issued direction to the State authorities to implement the mandate of the above two legislations. Mr. Purkayastha further submits that the petitioners herein are eligible senior Graduate Teachers of the three numbers of Special Schools of Government of Assam and they possess the requisite qualification and experience as mandated

¶62

Page No.# 12/18

¶63

by the RCI, and as such, the State respondents cannot legally deny promotion, which the petitioners are entitled to for being promoted to the post of Principal of the respective schools, and if necessary, by amending the Order of 1994. Under such circumstances, Mr. Purkayastha has contended to allow this petition by granting the reliefs as prayed for.

¶64

8.2. Mr. Purkayastha also producing a letter of the Rehabilitation Council of India, F. No. 8-A/Policy/2024 dated 06.01.2025, submits that there is also a requirement of RCI registration for serving ‘Persons with Disabilities’ as practicing without RCI registration in Govt./Non Govt. Organization/Private Practitioners is an offence under RCI Act No.34 of 1992 under Section 13(3). And as Mr. Purkayastha has contended to issue direction to the respondent authorities for making it compulsory for registration with RCI of all Govt./Non Govt. Organization/Private Practitioners, who are serving ‘Persons with Disabilities’.

¶65

9. Ms. Deka, learned counsel for the respondent Nos. 1, 2 and 6, during the course of hearing, has produced a letter dated 24.04.2025, issued by the Director of Social Justice and Empowerment, Assam, addressed to her, which indicates that the Department of Social Justice and Empowerment, Assam has already taken initiatives for publishing advertisement for filling up the vacant (all) post, including the post of Principal and Vice Principal, Jorhat Blind Institute, Jorhat through Assam Public Service Commission, and that an order was passed by Department of Social Justice and Empowerment, vide No. E- 234556/304, dated 31.07.2024, wherein it is stated that the claim of the petitioners for consideration of promotion to the post of Principal, Special Schools was duly considered, but in absence of statutory provision for promotion, it was rejected, and further as per Hon'ble Supreme Court’s order

¶66

Page No.# 13/18

¶67

dated 07.03.2025, in W.P(C) No. 132/2016, all the States and UT's of India are ordered to come out with advertisements for filling up of posts of teachers who have to impart education to children with special needs, and that the vacant post of one Principal and one Vice Principal in Jorhat Blind Institute, Jorhat and one post of Principal, in School for Hearing Impaired, Jorhat and 22 Special teachers will be filled up following the guidelines issued by the Rehabilitation Council of India, regarding educational qualifications etc., through direct recruitment. Under such circumstances, Ms. Deka has contended that this petition may be closed as the authorities have decided to fill up the posts as per RCI guidelines, which is the prime prayer of the petitioners in this petition.

¶68

10. On the other hand, Mr. Nath, learned Senior Government Advocate for the respondent No. 8 submits that since the authorities have decided to fill up the posts following the RCI guidelines and also as per direction of Hon’ble Supreme Court, and in that view of the matter, this writ petition may be closed.

¶69

11. Having heard the submissions of learned counsel for both the parties, I have carefully gone through the petition and the documents placed on record, and also perused the RCI guidelines for filling up the post of teachers and the relevant provision of Right of Persons with Disabilities Act, 2016, and the rules and regulations farmed there under, and also perused the Order of 1994.

¶70

12. It is not in dispute that the aforementioned Order of 1994, as amended in the year 2013, is contrary to the provision made in the Rehabilitation Council of India Act, 1992 and the Right of Persons with Disabilities Act, 2016, and the rules/regulations/ notifications framed there under.

¶71

13. It is also not in dispute that vide impugned order, dated 10.08.2020, (Annexure-4B) the respondent authorities had rejected the claim of the

¶72

Page No.# 14/18

¶73

petitioner No. 2, namely, Sri Lakshi Kanta Bharali for consideration of promotion to the post of Vice Principal in absence of any statutory provision for the same, as no such provision is there in the Order of 1994, as amended in the year 2013.

¶74

14. It is to be noted here that as per Annexure-10B, the minimum requirement of RCI approved qualification for appointment of Special Education Teachers, at Sl. No. 24, the minimum educational qualification for the post of Principal/Head Master of Secondary/Middle School is prescribed as :- M.Ed. in relevant special education field with 2 years experience of B.Ed. in Spl. Education with 4 years experience or diploma in Spl. Education with 6 years experience or BRS Graduates with 5 years experience.

¶75

15. The petitioners herein, as reveals from perusal of the paragraph No. 3 of the petition, possessed following qualification:-

¶76

Sl. No.	Name	Qualification	Date of joining and designation	Name of present School
01.	Riyajul Islam	MA, B.Sc.(Hons) B.Ed.(HI), ISLT, DCA	06.05.2013, Science Graduate Asstt. Teacher	BDS Govt. Higher Secondary School for hearing impaired
02.	Lakshi Kanta Bharali	BA, Special B. Ed.	17.09.1996, Graduate Asstt. Teacher	Jorhat Blind Institution
03	Papari Borah	B.Sc., MA, (MSW),B.Ed., DHLS	07.05.2013, Science Asstt. Teacher	School of hearing impaired, Jorhat

¶77

15.1. From a perusal of the aforesaid chart vis-à-vis the minimum

¶78

Page No.# 15/18

¶79

requirement of RCI approved qualification for being appointed as Special Education Teachers, at Sl. No. 24, of the Annexure-10B, the minimum educational qualification for the post of Principal/Head Master of Secondary/Middle School, it cannot be said that they are not qualified for consideration to the post of Principal of the Special Schools. They have also got RCI registration for having the RCI recognized qualification.

¶80

15.2. But, vide impugned order dated 10.08.2020, (Annexure-4B) the respondent authorities had rejected the claim of the petitioner No. 2, namely, Sri Lakshi Kanta Bharali for consideration of promotion to the post of Vice Principal, in absence of any statutory provision for the same, as no such provision is there in the Order of 1994, as amended in the year 2013, despite specific direction of this Court in the order dated 02.09.2019, in WP(C) No. 6322/2019.

¶81

15.3. Thus, the Order of 1994, as amended in the year 2013, appears to be in conflict and repugnant with the RCI guidelines so framed under Rehabilitation Council of India Act, 1992 and the Right of Persons with Disabilities Act, 2016, and the rules/regulations/ notifications framed there under and the same is not in dispute as discussed herein above. Thus, the impugned order dated 10.08.2020, (Annexure-4B) seems to be arbitrary and illegal and it failed to withstand the legal scrutiny and liable to be interfered with on this count alone.

¶82

16. It is also to be noted here that in the case of Rajneesh Kumar Pandey & Ors. vs. Union of India & Ors. Writ petition(s) (Civil) No(s). 132/2016, in the order dated 07.03.2025, Hon’ble Supreme Court had passed following orders(s), in respect of selection and appointment of qualified/competent/ eligible teachers who have to impart education to children with special needs. Further, Hon’ble Supreme Court had emphasized the

¶83

Page No.# 16/18

¶84

requirement of RCI qualification certificate for appointment to the post of teachers.

¶85

Each States and UTs shall come out with notifications with the number of posts that they have sanctioned for teachers who have to impart education to children with special needs.

¶86

2. After the posts have been sanctioned and notified, which shall be done positively within a period of three weeks from today i.e. on or before 28.03.2025, these posts need to be advertised at least in two newspapers having wide circulation in the respective States as well as on the website of the Department of Education and also on the official Government website of each of the States.

¶87

3. Let the selection and appointment be made of qualified/competent/eligible teachers only. Further, the requirement of RCI1 qualification certificate also needs to be taken into account for appointment to the post as directed by this Court in its judgment dated Rehabilitation Council of India 28.10.2021, as a candidate not having RCI Certificate shall be ineligible.

¶88

17. Since vide letter dated 24.04.2025, the respondent No. 2 had decided to fill up the vacant posts including the post of Principal and Vice Principal, Jorhat Blind Institute, Jorhat and in School for Hearing Impaired, Jorhat and 22 Special Teachers following the Rehabilitation Council of India guidelines regarding educational qualification etc. through Assam Public Service Commission, this Court is of the considered opinion that as the main prayer of the petitioners in the present petition has been acceded to, by the respondent authorities, no live issue remains to be decided.

¶89

18. Under such circumstances, this Court is inclined to dispose of this

¶90

Page No.# 17/18

¶91

petition with the following directions:-

¶92

(i) The impugned order, dated 10.08.2020 (Annexure-4B) issued by the respondent No. 1; stands set aside and quashed being arbitrary and illegal.

¶93

(ii) The respondent authorities shall have to fill up the vacant posts of Principal and Vice Principal and 22 posts of Special Teachers, as per guidelines for minimum requirement of RCI approved qualification for appointment of Special Education Teachers, in the letter/circular, Dated 11.01.2012 (Annexure 10B), issued by the RCI and also as per order of Hon’ble Supreme Court, dated 07.03.2025, in Writ Petition (Civil) No. 132/2016.

¶94

(iii) The respondent authorities, specially respondent No.1, 2 and 6 shall take necessary steps for amendment of the Order of 1994, as amended in the year 2013, as per the mandate of the Circular, dated 11.01.2012 (Annexure-10B), issued by the RCI, to the extent the same being repugnant to two central legislations i.e. Rehabilitation Council of India Act, 1992, the Right of Persons with Disabilities Act, 2016;

¶95

(iv) To consider the case of the petitioners for being promoted to the aforementioned vacant posts of Vice Principal/Principal, in the Special Schools, subject however, to fulfillment of all requisite criteria, adhering to the guidelines issued by the RCI.

¶96

(v) To make it compulsory for registration of all Govt./Non Govt. Organization/Private Practitioners, who are serving ‘Persons with Disabilities’, with the RCI in view of the letter of the Rehabilitation

¶97

Page No.# 18/18

¶98

Council of India, F. No. 8-A/Policy/2024 dated 06.01.2025, since practicing without RCI registration in Govt./Non Govt. Organization/Private Practitioners is an offence under RCI Act No.34 of 1992 under Section 13(3).

¶99

(vi) The exercise contemplated in (ii), (iii) and (iv) above, has to be carried out within a period of three months, from the date of receipt of certified copy of this judgment and order.

¶100

(vii) The petitioners shall obtain a certified copy of this judgment and order and place it before the respondent authorities, especially, respondent Nos. 1, 2 and 6 within a period of one week from today.

¶101

19. The parties have to bear their own costs.

¶102

JUDGE

¶103

Comparing Assistant

Md. Riyajul Islam and 2 Ors. v. the State of Assam and 8 Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Md. Riyajul Islam and 2 Ors. v. the State of Assam and 8 Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

The Assam Power Distribution Company Limited and 2 Ors. Vs Junmoni Gogoi and Anr.

Babul Chandra Deka and 4 Ors. Vs Bhagawan Deka and 6 Ors.

Nerswn Boro Vs Sri Pradip Toppo

Ratan Das Vs Mr Kamakhya Prasad Agarwalla @ Kamakhya Prasad Bagaria and Ors.

Ratan Das Vs Mr Kamakhya Prasad Agarwalla @ Kamakhya Prasad Bagaria and Ors.

Abed Ullah Vs Chemist and Druggist Assoiation of Assam