Md Abul Hasen v. Abdul Akher Ali and 9 Ors

PageoNo.#o1/5 GAHC010176842024 ooooooo undefined ooooooooooooooo ooooooooooooooooTHEoGAUHATIoHIGHoCOURTo (HIGHoCOURToOFoASSAM,oNAGALAND,oMIZORAMoANDoARUNACHALoPRADESH)o CaseoNo.o:oWA/308/2024o MDoABULoHASENo S/OoLT.oTURABoALIoVILLoKESHARVITAoP.O.oJHOWDANGAoDIST.oSOUTHo SALMARAoMANKACHARoASSAMoPINo783131 VERSUSo ABDULoAKHERoALIoANDo9oORSo S/OoLT.oABDURoRAHMANoVILLoKESHARVITAoP.O.oJHOWDANGAoDIST.o SOUTHoSALMARAoMANKACHARoASSAMoPINo783131 2:THEoSTATEoOFoASSAM oREP.oBYoTHEoSECRETARYoGOVT.oOFoASSAMoDEPTT.oOFoSCHOOLo EDUCATIONoDISPURoGUWAHATIo6 3:THEoPRINCIPALoSECRETARY oGOVT.oOFoASSAMoFINANCEoDEPTT.oDISPURoGUWAHATIo6 4:THEoDIRECTOR oELEMENTARYoEDUCATIONoASSAMoKAHILIPARAoGUWAHATIo19 5:THEoDEPUTYoCOMMISSIONER oDHUBRI oP.O.oANDoDIST.oDHUBRIoASSAMoPINo7833301 6:DISTRICToELEMENTARYoEDUCATIONoOFFICER oSOUTHoSALMARAoMANKACHARoHATSINGIMARIoP.O.oFEKAMARIoDIST.o SOUTHoSALMARAoMANKACHARoASSAMoPINo783135 7:THEoDISTRICToELEMENTARYoEDUCATIONoOFFICER oDHUBRI oP.O.oANDoDIST.oDHUBRIoASSAMoPINo783301 Page No.# 2/5 8:THE BLOCK ELEMENTRAY EDUCATION OFFICER SOUTH SALMARA MANKACHAR HATSINGIMARI P.O. FEKAMARI DIST. SOUTH SALMARA MANKACHAR ASSAM PIN 783105 9:THE HEADMASTER CHUTO KESHARVITA L P SCHOOL VIL. KESHARVITA P.O. JHOWDANGA DIST SOUTH SALMARA MANKACHAR ASSAM PIN 783131 10:SAFIUL HOQUE S/O LT NUR HUSSAIN R/O VILL. KESHARVITA P.O.JHOWDANGA DIST. SOUTH SALMARA MANKACHAR ASSAM PIN 78313 For the appellant : Mr. S.K. Talukdar, Ms. T.R. Ovung, Mr. A. Sayed, Advocates

For the respondents : Mr. U.P. Chaliha, Advocate for Respondent No.1 Mr. R. Mazumdar, S.C., Elementary Education for respondent Nos.2, 4, 6, 7 & 8 Mr. R. Borpujari, S.C., Finance For respondent No.3 Ms. R.B. Bora, Govt. Advocate, Assam, for respondent No.5

Page No.# 3/5 – B E F O R E – HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR. VIJAY BISHNOI HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE KAUSHIK GOSWAMI 09-12-2024 (Vijay Bishnoi, C.J.) This writ appeal is filed by on behalf of the appellant challenging the judgment and order dated 01.08.2024 passed by the learned Single Judge in WP(C) 4881/2023 and WP(C) 4564/2023 only to the extent where the learned Single Judge, while granting liberty to the writ petitioner, who has filed WP(C) 4564/2023 and has been impleaded as respondent No.1 in this writ appeal, to institute proceedings before the jurisdictional Educational Tribunal by invoking Section 19 (2) of The Assam Education (Provincialisation of Services of Teachers and Re-organisation of Educational Institutions) Act, 2017, for establishing his claim for provincialisation of his services in the school in question within stipulated time. The learned Single Judge has also issued a direction to the respondent No.1 herein to implead Md. Safiul Hoque as well as the appellant Md. Abul Hasen, who were respondent Nos.9 and 10, respectively in WP(C) 4564/2023, as party respondents in such proceedings.

¶2Mr. S.K. Talukdar, learned counsel for the appellant has submitted that, as a matter of fact, the learned Single Judge, by the impugned order has allowed the writ petition, being, WP(C) 4881/2023 filed on behalf of the appellant and has confirmed the provincialisation of his services on the post of Teacher in the subject of Social Studies/Science and has also issued direction to the State respondents to issue consequential orders within a period of 45 days from the date of passing of the impugned order. Learned counsel has also submitted that the dispute regarding Page No.# 4/5 provincialisation of services as teacher was in between the respondent No.1 and respondent No.10 herein and there is no dispute with regard to provincialisation of services of the appellant as Social Studies/Science Teacher. It is further submitted that the direction issued by the learned Single Judge in paragraph 54 of the impugned judgment and order to the respondent No.1 herein to implead the appellant as well as the respondent No.10 herein as party respondents before the Educational Tribunal is unwarranted and the same may be interfered with.

¶3Mr. U.P. Chaliha, learned counsel appearing for the respondent No.1 herein and the learned counsel appearing for the official respondents are also of the view that the direction issued by the learned Single Judge in paragraph 54 of the impugned judgment and order directing to implead the appellant as well as the respondent No.10 herein as party respondents is unwarranted because the actual dispute is between the respondent No.1 and respondent No.10 herein in respect of provincialisation of their services as teacher.

¶4Despite service of notice upon the respondent No.10 herein, none has appeared on behalf of him.

¶5Taking into consideration the fact that the actual dispute regarding provincialisation of services as teacher is between the respondent No.1 and respondent No.10 herein, it appears that the direction given by the learned Single Judge to the respondent No.1 herein to implead the appellant and the respondent No.10 herein as party respondents before the Educational Tribunal is unnecessary and unwarranted. Hence, this writ appeal is allowed and the impugned order of the learned Single Judge to the extent of directing the Page No.# 5/5 respondent No.1 herein to implead the appellant as well as the respondent No.10 herein as party respondents in the Educational Tribunal is interfered with and the same is set aside.

¶6We make it clear that the judgment and order dated 01.08.2024 passed by the learned Single Judge is interfered with only to the extent as clarified above and the other directions and observations of the learned Single Judge in the impugned judgment and order are not interfered with.

¶7With these observations, this writ appeal is disposed of.

JUDGE CHIEF JUSTICE Comparing Assistant