Nur Mohammad Vs the State of Assam

By filing this application under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner has prayed that although a minor punishment was imposed upon him after an inquiry conducted by the concerned authority in the Office of Secondary Education Assam, but some other penalties were also imposed upon him such as taking away the financial power from him as well as not paying the remaining salary during the period he was put under suspension. The case of the petitioner is that he was appointed as a Principal on regular basis and posted in Chakla Higher Secondary School, District Bongaigaon against the existing vacant post by order dated 06.03.2019 and he was working as the Principal of the said school since then. However, after two years i.e. on 08.11.2021, the petitioner was put under suspension on the allegation that he failed to submit the utilization certificate in due time against the fee waving for the year 2020. The petitioner was as such served with a show cause notice asking his reply as to why disciplinary action should not be taken against him. It was further alleged that the petitioner had neither submitted the utilization certificate nor responded to the higher authority’s instructions and as such considering the said facts and circumstances and before obtaining the approval from the Director of Secondary Education, Assam and subject to pending departmental proceeding, the petitioner was placed under suspension with immediate effect as per Assam Services (Discipline and Appeal) Rules, 1964. The petitioner was however

¶23

Page No.# 3/6

¶24

allowed to draw his subsistence allowance as per FR 53(ii). Thereafter, by an order dated 04.03.2022, the petitioner who was placed under suspension was allowed to draw 75 percent of his last basic pay as subsistence allowance with effect from the expiry of first three months of placing him under suspension. It is stated by the petitioner that he had submitted his show cause reply and the same was considered by the Office of the Director, Secondary Education. After receiving the show cause reply from the petitioner, the Enquiry Committee started the enquiry and during pendency of the departmental proceeding, the Enquiry Officer submitted a report to the Director cum Disciplinary Authority, Secondary Education, Assam and on the basis of the said report of the Enquiry Officer dated 29.11.2022, the petitioner was reinstated in his service as Principal of the same school vide order dated 21.12.2022. It is further contemplated in the said order dated 21.12.2022 that there is every possibility of tampering of documents and evidences and as such the petitioner is although reinstated in his service but he was not allowed to exercise the financial power till disposal of the ongoing departmental proceeding. It was also contemplated in the said order that petitioner shall not perform the duties and responsibilities of Principal and shall not exercise the financial power and also that the Inspector of School, BDC, Bongaigaon would exercise the said financial power of the school. It was also directed by the said order that the Inspector of Schools, Bongaigaon would submit the audit report on various, Government grants allotted to the said school i.e. Chakla HS School, during the period when the petitioner was continuing as the Principal. Thereafter on 25.01.2024, the Assistant Director of audit of Goalpara Circle had intimated the Principal i.e. the petitioner that he had sent his first reply to the audit report duly approved by the SMDC to the concerned office. In the said report, it is seen that some unspent amount was

¶25

Page No.# 4/6

¶26

returned during the financial year 2022-2023 to the Government and together with some un-authorized expenditure as well as the doubtful expenditure and irregularities in maintenance of cash book and also allegations of temporary misappropriation, with some other irregularities were found against the petitioner who was working as a Principal from 07.03.2019 to 10.11.2023. The said report was also against two other In-Charge Principal, who were working on different dates one was before the petitioner joined and the other when the petitioner was put under suspension.

¶27

Thereafter, the final audit report was submitted on 12.02.2024 in respect of the petitioner and a request was made by the In-Charge, Inspector of Schools to close the departmental proceeding against the petitioner. Pursuant to the said order, the Director of Secondary Education, Assam vide order on 08.04.2024 passed an order that the Inspector of Schools had submitted the audit report on 12.02.2024 which demonstrated that no major financial irregularities was found on the part of the petitioner and that few procedural lapses on utilizing the funds/Government funds received by the school were found against the petitioner. It was further stated that on thorough examination, administrative inability was found on the part of the petitioner and on such findings it was decided to impose minor penalty of censure on the petitioner, as provided under Rule 7 (1) of the Assam Services (Discipline and Appeal) Rules, 1964. Accordingly, the minor penalty of censure was imposed upon the petitioner with the further stipulation that the period of suspension of the petitioner to be regularized for pensionary benefits and that the emoluments received by the petitioner during his suspension period would be his entitlement. It was also ordered that the Inspector of Schools shall act as the drawing and Disbursing Officer and also shall exercise the financial power. With the said order, the

¶28

Page No.# 5/6

¶29

disciplinary proceeding was disposed of against the petitioner.

¶30

The petitioner was aggrieved by the part of the order passed on 08.04.2024 by which his financial power was taken away and that the remaining part of his salary during the period of his suspension was not paid as well as the increment amount. To ventilate his grievance, he submitted a representation to the Director of Secondary Education on 31.12.2024 with a prayer to restore his financial power as well as to pay his remaining salary stopped during his suspension period.

¶31

It is stated by the learned Counsel for the petitioner that during the pendency of the instant writ petition, this Court had directed the authorities to consider the representation submitted by the petitioner and in pursuant to that order the Director of Secondary Education, Assam vide order dated 30.01.2026 had held that the petitioner cannot be invested with the financial power in the school at the present stage, in view of his alleged involvement in collection of fees from the students of Class-IX and X which was found on record and as such the claim of the petitioner to give him the financial power was not allowed as well as release of his remaining salary. By the said order, the said representation was disposed of.

¶32

The learned Counsel for the petitioner submits that in the order dated 08.04.2024, it was reflected that petitioner was not involved in any major financial irregularities and that only few procedural lapses were found in utilizing the funds/Government funds received by the school and also that administrative inability was found in respect of the petitioner and as such warning was given to the petitioner for such inaction or irregularity but in the reply to his representation dated 30.01.2026, it was stated that the petitioner was found involved in collection of fees from the students which however was not the case

¶33

Page No.# 6/6

¶34

when the petitioner was put under suspension or when the inquiry report was submitted. He also had placed that in the order of his suspension, the only allegations against the petitioner was that he failed to submit the utilization certificate in due time. It is in fact noticed in the suspension order that petitioner was placed under the same only for non-submission of utilization certificate and also in the subsequent orders it is seen that few procedural lapses were found with regard to the petitioner and findings were recorded that the petitioner was unable to continue with his administrative duties but no financial irregularities were attributed to him. Although in the first audit report, there was some allegation which did not find place in the final report submitted by the authorities. Considering the above facts and circumstances, it is in fitness of the things that the petitioner may submit another representation to the Director of Secondary Education, Assam, by bringing into the said facts which would be considered by the said authority within a reasonable period of time by taking into consideration, the documents of the instant case and without being influenced by the order dated 30.01.2026. It is further directed that the authorities may consider the application and dispose it of within a period of one month from the date of receipt of this order.

¶35

Petition is disposed of.

¶36

JUDGE

¶37

Comparing Assistant

Nur Mohammad v. the State of Assam

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Nur Mohammad v. the State of Assam

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Gias Uddin Ahmed Vs the State of Assam and 5 Ors.

Mausam Dutta Vs the State of Assam and 4 Ors.

Machuma Khatun Vs the State of Assam and 6 Ors.

Nitul Barman Vs the Sttae of Assam and 3 Ors.

Pawan Kumar Tiwari Vs Govind Mohan, IAS and 5 Ors.

Tankeswar Nath Vs the State of Assam and 3 Ors.