CHARULATA KALITA Vs. STATE OF ASSAM

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The instant intra-Court writ appeal is directed against the judgment dtd. 25/1/2019 passed by the learned Single Judge whereby the writ petition, being, WP(C) 2555/2017 filed by the appellant herein challenging the selection process and the consequent appointment of the respondent No.7 on the post of Principal of A.K.H.S. Institution in the district of Kamrup, was dismissed.

(2.) The appellant/writ petitioner herein was one of the aspirants for the said post. She participated in the selection process which was undertaken by the School Selection Committee through viva-voce. In the panel of short listed candidates, the name of the appellant/writ petitioner figured at Sl. No.3, i.e. the last position whereas the respondent No.7 figured at Sl. No.1. The appellant filed the writ petition laying challenge to the process of selection on the ground that there was violation of the rules in composition of School Selection Committee and so also about the eligibility of the respondent No.7 to be considered for the post of Principal. The learned Single Judge dismissed the writ petition by the judgment dtd. 25/1/2019 which is assailed in this appeal.

(3.) We have heard the submissions advanced by Mr. B. Chetri, learned counsel representing the appellant and have gone through the impugned judgment and the record. The advertisement for selection against the post of Principal of A.K.H.S. institution was published on 9/6/2016. The selection was to be conducted in accordance with the Rule 13 of the Assam Secondary Education (Provincialised) Service Rules, 2003 (hereinafter referred to as '2003 Rules') read with the guidelines dtd. 23/6/2016 issued by the Director of Secondary Education. The viva-voce was conducted by the School Selection Committee on 8/11/2016 and the matter was kept pending at the level of the department. The appellant/writ petitioner claims that she was not aware about the outcome of the selection process undertaken by the School Selection Committee. In the intervening period, the in-charge Principal retired from service on 31/3/2017 and thus, the appellant/writ petitioner was allowed to hold the charge of the post of Principal. The appellant/writ petitioner claims that she had raised her voice regarding the anomalies in the school fund and thus, the School Management Committee was annoyed with her and hence, she was not treated fairly in the selection. The pleaded case of the appellant/writ petitioner in the writ petition was that she came to know on 18/4/2017 that the respondent No.7 had been selected for the post of Principal and was going to be appointed and thus, she submitted representations dtd. 19/4/2017 and 24/4/2017 to the Deputy Commissioner and the Inspector of Schools, respectively raising a voice against the illegality in the process of selection. However, when no response was forthcoming to her complaints/representations, the appellant/writ petitioner filed the captioned writ petition wherein an interim order was passed on 3/5/2017 allowing the petitioner to continue in the arrangement previously made as in-charge Principal of the said school. A formal order dtd. 2/5/2017 was issued by the Director of Secondary Education appointing Smti Purabi Bharali Das, respondent No.7 in the writ petition as well as in the appeal, as the Principal on regular basis pursuant to the recommendation of the State Selection Board. The order dated 02.05.20217 was brought on record of the writ petition and was put to challenge through an additional affidavit.