ASHISH KUMAR SENGUPTA Vs. STATE OF ASSAM

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner is a Graduate in Science and he was appointed as Assistant Teacher in the then Ledo Bazar High English School by the Managing Committee by an order passed on 25/2/1967. Since then he has been working in this school and on a number of occasions had the opportunity to act as In-charge Assistant headmaster/ Headmaster. The respondent No. 4 was appointed as a Teacher under the Half-a- Million-Job Programme. His initial appointment was as a stipendary teacher at a fixed salary of Rs.150/- per month. He was outside the cadre of regular teachers till 1986. In 1986, the services of all the teachers throughout the State of Assam were encadered except the teachers appointed under Half-a-Million-Job Programme. The school in question was recognised in 1972 and provincialised in 1977. The seniority list maintained in the school placed the petitioner at serial No. 1 and the respondent No. 4 at serial No. 4. Despite that, on 11.4.96, the respondent No.3, the Inspector of Schools, Tinsukia issued an order promoting respondent No.4 to act as Incharge Assistant headmaster temporarily on the ground that he was given the Graduate scale with effect from 1.1.75. This was done in flagrant violation of the petitioner's right as he was the senior-most teacher in the school. Thereafter, the respondent No. 4 was allowed to act as Assistant Headmaster (i/c) of the school by an order passed on 11.4.96. Later, he was appointed to act as Headmaster by an order dated 29/1/1998. The petitioner submitted various representations to the authorities concerned without any result. The petitioner joined the school on 1/3/1967, whereas the respondent No. 4 joined the school on 19/2/1974 and they are equally qualified and eligible for appointment to the post of Headmaster. According to the writ petitioner, the respondent No. 4 cannot be senior to him merely because he was given the Graduate scale of pay in 1975.

(2.) It appears that the State of Assam has not filed any affidavit in this petition. However, the respondent No. 4 filed an affidavit wherein he has submitted that in the later part of 1985, the Director of Public Instructions issued an order by which all the teachers of all cadres were encadred enabling the teachers appointed under the Half-a-Million-Job Programme to get promotion to the post of Assistant Headmaster and Headmaster. The seniority list prepared by the Headmaster showing the writ petitioner as senior-most has been challenged as unauthorised. Since this respondent No. 4 was allowed Graduate scale of pay from 1.1.75 and the petitioner from 1.4.76, it is the respondent No. 4 who) is senior to the writ petitioner for all purposes including promotion.

(3.) The learned counsel for the parties argued at length to justify the respective stand of the parties.