SUKLESWAR KAKATI Vs. STATE OF ASSAM

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Mr. A. Deka, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Ms. N. Phukan, learned Standing Counsel, Secondary Education Department.

(2.) In this petition the petitioner has sought for a direction to the respondent authorities to give promotion to the petitioner to the post of Headmaster in Ghagua Secondary School, Morigaon on regular basis in terms of Rule 15 (4) of the Assam Secondary Education (Provincialisation) Service Rules, 2003 as amended in 2012. The grievance of the petitioner is that the petitioner along with 8 other candidates of different districts were duly recommended for promotion to the posts of regular Headmasters by the State Selection Board, which was also approved by the Government by its letter No.ASE.360/2019/2016 dated 19.11.2019. Pursuant to the said recommendation granted by the State Government, 12 Assistant Teachers/Headmasters of different provincialised High Schools and High Madrassas of Tinsukia district were already given promotions to the post of regular Headmaster/Superintendent in the scale of pay band-III of Rs.22,000/- to Rs.97,000/- and Grade Pay Rs.11,800/- and other allowances as admissible as per rules. However, unfortunately, though the petitioner was also recommended by the State Selection Board along with the other candidates and which recommendation was also approved by the State Government on 19.11.2019 as mentioned above, the case of the petitioner has not been considered. Being aggrieved on not being promoted to the post of regular Headmaster/ Superintendent till date as mentioned above, the petitioner has approached this Court.

(3.) This Court by order dated 18.12.2019 directed, the respondent no.2, the Director of Secondary Education to file an affidavit to clarify the reason as to why the promotion order was not issued in favour of the petitioner. Pursuant the same, the Director of Secondary Education has issued the promotion order to the petitioner on 19.12.2019, however, giving it effect from the date of joining of the petitioner. The grievance of the petitioner is that since the petitioner was recommended by the State Selection Board along with the other candidates, which recommendation was also approved by the State Government, the denial of his promotion was illegal and he should be given the similar benefits in respect to the other selected candidates. This Court has gone through the order dated 19.12.2019, which reads as follows: