AFTABUDDIN Vs. STATE OF ASSAM

JUDGEMENT

(1.) An advertisement was published sometime in the year 1996 calling for applications for filling up of about 1,000 posts of Graduate Teachers in the different High Schools/High Madrassas in the State of Assam. A Select List was prepared sometime in the year 1997 pursuant to the selection held and there is no dispute that all the posts advertised were filled up. However, as usual, a number of persons otherwise selected continued to remain in the Select List without being appointed. Thereafter, it appears that a ban on appointment of teachers was imposed by the Government and the said ban continued till it was lifted by a W.T. Message dated 25.3.2001. The aforesaid W.T. Message was issued to all the Inspectors of Schools in the State requiring them to make appointments on fixed pay without however, calling for fresh applications. A Select List was directed to be prepared from the candidates who had earlier submitted their applications. In so far as the Classical Teachers are concerned, in the W.T. Message, it was directed that the Select list of such teachers should be prepared out of the persons who had applied earlier and who had proficiency in different classical subjects i.e. Hindi, Arabic, Sanskrit etc. Thereafter, a second W.T. Message dated 26.3.2001 was issued intimating all the Inspectors of Schools the number of vacancies that were required to be filled in each district. The vacancies indicated in the second W.T. Message dated 26.3.2001 was in respect of the Graduate Teachers as well as Classical Teachers. Acting on the basis of the aforesaid W.T. Messages, a Select List was prepared on 28.3.2001 in so far as the Dhubri district is concerned wherein the names of the 16 petitioners were included under the list of Classical Teachers prepared in respect of the different constituencies of the district. Appointment to each of the petitioners was conferred by identical orders dated 30.3.2001 passed by the jurisdictional Inspector of Schools and each of the petitioners joined service pursuant to the appointment made. On 30.3.2001, another W.T. Message was sent from the State Government to all the Inspectors of Schools intimating them that power of appointment of Classical Teachers has been invested in the Director of Secondary Education and, therefore, the Inspector of Schools ought not to make any appointment against the posts of Classical Teachers, as ordered earlier. As some of the appointments had already been made as in the case of the petitioners, a further communication dated 19.4.2002 was addressed to the Inspectors of Schools asking them to cancel the appointments of Classical Teachers, as may have been made. The aforesaid communication dated 19.4.2002 was issued by the Deputy Secretary to the Government of Assam, Education Department and thereafter, acting on the said basis, the Inspector of Schools, Dhubri District Circle, by a series of identical orders dated 4.5.2002, cancelled the appointments of the petitioners. Aggrieved, the instant writ application has been filed.

(2.) I have heard Mr. A. S. Choudhury, learned senior counsel for the writ petitioners as well as Mr. S. N. Sarma, learned senior Standing Counsel, Education Department.

(3.) Mr. Choudhury, learned counsel for the petitioners by pointing out the W.T. Messages dated 25.3.2001 and 26.3.2001 has contended that the appointments of the petitioners were made in accordance with the norms laid down by the Government itself in the aforesaid W.T. Messages particularly, the W.T. Message dated 25.3.2001. The petitioners are selected candidates and selections have taken place in accordance with the norms prescribed by the W.T. Message dated 25.3.2001. No infirmity can, therefore, be attached to the Select List in which the names of the petitioners have been included. According to the learned counsel for the petitioners, under the provisions of the Assam Secondary Education (Provincialization) Service Rules, 1982, as amended, it is the Inspector of School, who is the competent authority to make appointments of Classical Teachers which posts are included in Grades- IV to VII of the relevant Schedule to the Rules. The power of appointment conferred by the Rules, according to the learned counsel for the petitioners, has been sought to be taken away and conferred on the Director without authority of law. The impugned cancellation made on the basis that it is the Director who is the competent authority to make appointments, would have no legs to stand, according to the learned counsel for the petitioner. It has been also argued by Mr. Choudhury, learned counsel for the petitioners that the cancellations made being without any notice or opportunity is in violation of principles of natural justice.