DEBESWAR BORA Vs. STATE OF ASSAM & OTHERS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Debeswar Bora is the petitioner in this case. He passed the Matriculation examination with 35.7% of marks. He also passed the Pre-University course with 35.08% of marks. On June 24, 1986 when an advertisement appeared inviting applications for appointment of teachers in L.P. Schools and Middle Schools he applied for the appointment in a Middle School in spite of the fact that in the advertisement it was mentioned by the Director of Elementary Education, Assam that an applicant must have had secured 40% of marks in HSLC Examination if he were to apply for Primary Schools and similarly 40% of marks a candidate should have obtained in Pre-University Course if he were to apply for Middle School. The requirement of 40% marks in the two examinations as appeared in the advertisement was amended later by the Director of Elementary Education by Memo No. EAA. 59/86/18 dated July 9, 1986. In that amendment it was recited that applications may be received from those who have secured less than 40% of marks in both HSLC or Pre-University Examination. Thus after amendment of advertisement all those who applied were considered.

(2.) Debeswar Bora was selected. He was appointed in Lahir Kumar Gaon M.V. School in the pay scale of Rs. 525.00 to 920.00 on Aug. 2, 1988. Thereafter on April 23, 1990 his services were terminated principally on the ground that in the Pre-University Examination he did not secure 40% of marks. The petitioner hence approached this Court to quash the order of termination dated April 23, 1990 and for other incidental reliefs.

(3.) While this case was being considered by this Court a large number of cases were filed by teachers whose services were terminated more or less in similar manner. There are writ petitions where the teachers were not appointed though selected. The reason being that they did not obtain 40% of marks in HSLC Examination. Thus there was a revival of the condition of 40% which appeared in the advertisement before July 9, 1986 amendment. The counsel who appeared for such candidates were heard while hearing this case. During the debate counsel who appeared for the teachers of L.P. Schools and Middle Schools whose services were terminated, were also heard. The cases of teachers who were not appointed to repeat for the reason that they did not secure 40% of marks for appointment to the post of teachers of L.P.School or Middle Schools were also heard.