JOHN PAJEELLARD K MARAK Vs. STATE OF MEGHALAYA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) IN this writ petition, the petitioner challenged the appointment of respondent (hereunder mentioned as 'R') No.7 as Principal by R 5 on 23.10.10 which was subsequently approved by R-4 vide Office memo No. SDG/MC/DF-26/2010 dated 02.03.11 (Annexure-7 to the writ petition). The petitioner also challenged the order No. SSS/MC-Secy/F-07/2010/93dated 06.04.11 issued by R 6 reverting/demoting the petitioner to the post of Assistant Teacher (hereunder mentioned as AT) from the post of Vice Principal (hereunder mentioned as VP).

(2.) I have heard the learned Advocate Ms. A. Paul for the writ petitioner. Also heard learned senior GA. Mr. N. D. Chullai for respondent Nos. 1, 2, 3 & 4, learned Advocate Mr. R. Kar for respondent Nos. 5 & 6 and Mr. S.G. Momin, learned counsel for respondent No. 7.

(3.) ON behalf of Respondent Nos. 5 and 6, an affidavit-in-oppostition is submitted by R-6 contending interalia that there was nothing wrong done by the respondents as the appointment/promotion to the post of Principal of R-7 is only as per direction of the Education Department of the Government of Meghalaya. It is also stated that the MC designated the petitioner as VP of the school but such designation is not approved/sanctioned by the Inspector of School (I.S.) on the ground that it is an un-amalgamated school and there exist no post of VP and therefore the petitioner was accomodated in his original post which was not at all demotion in rank. It is further stated that the claim of the petitioner that he has passed MA in English, is shrouded with suspicion as the mark sheet enclosed as R-4 series to the writ petition was contrary to that of the mark sheet submitted to the Principal (A-1 to A-V to the affidavit in opposition) and therefore, the Principal of the School on 31.05.11 requested the Education Department to cause an inquiry into the same. It is also stated that R-7 is better qualified to be promoted as Principal as he was having with B.Ed degree, whereas the petitioner only appeared in the first year of B. Ed. course and therefore the petitioner was not having with requisite qualifiation. In regard to seniority the matter was brought to the notice of R-4 Inspector of school and he directed considering the qualification and seniority, R-7 to be promoted to the post of Principal of the school and accordingly the order is issued. The representations submitted by the petitioner are rightly ignored as he is not entitled to any relief as claimed. The respondents therefore prayed for dismissal of the writ petition.