RABIN CH. SARMA Vs. STATE OF ASSAM

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The issue involved in the instant writ petition pertains to whether the petitioners who have been appointed against non-sanctioned posts and upon being regularized subsequently to sanctioned posts would be entitled to claim seniority from the date of initial appointment to non-sanctioned post.

(2.) Heard Mr. M. Sharma, the learned counsel for the Petitioners, Mr. K. Gogoi, the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the Respondent No. 1 and 3, Mrs. D.D. Barman, the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the Respondent No. 2 and Mr. R. Borpujari, the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the Respondent No. 4.

(3.) The facts of the instant case are that the petitioners herein were appointed as lecturers in their respective colleges pursuant to an advertisement, selection process and interview and with necessary approval/concurrence of the governing body of the college. Admittedly the petitioners were appointed against non-sanctioned post. At this stage, it may be relevant herein to note that the Secretary to the Government of Assam, Education Department had issued an Office Memorandum dtd. 17/7/2004. A perusal of the said Office Memorandum would show that there were more than 300 college teachers found to be in different Degree Colleges(deficit-grant-in-aid-college) of Assam since 1989 serving for 5 to 14 years without any valid sanctioned posts. These teachers have been serving in the colleges in the consolidated pay allowed by the respective college authorities from their own fund. These teachers were appointed by the respective governing bodies of the Colleges on need basis as per UGC guidelines. Further to that the Government of Assam has also accorded concurrence to the subjects against which these teachers were appointed and these teachers have been performing similar responsibilities like those teachers who have been working against sanctioned posts in the college. Further to that, it has been mentioned that the Government could not sanction any additional post to the deficit-grant-in-aid colleges since 1992. 52 numbers of colleges though were brought under the deficit system of grant-in-aid by the Government since 1992 but the Government had not sanctioned an additional post of lecturers since then over and above originally allocated sanctioned post. Under such circumstances, the college authorities appointed lecturers without valid sanctioned post bearing the additional financial burden. It further appears from the perusal of the Office Memorandum that 140 college teachers serving in different colleges without sanctioned post filed proceedings before this Court. This Court vide order dtd. 11/2/2003 in W.P.(C) No. 626/2002 and order dtd. 25/7/2003 in W.P.(C) No. 2368/2002 directed the Government to consider the matter of sanction of post to the college teachers serving without any sanctioned posts. Paragraph 4 along with its sub-paragraphs (a) to (d) being relevant are quoted herein below:-