BINOD KUMAR Vs. STATE OF ASSAM

JUDGEMENT

(1.) In this writ petition, the two petitioners, who are dropped teachers, are seeking the intervention of this Court for directing the respondent authorities to provincialize their services in the posts of Assistant Teacher of M.E. Schools.

(2.) The facts giving rise to the writ petition, as pleaded by the petitioners, may be briefly noticed at the outset. The petitioner No. 1 was appointed as Assistant Teachers of Thailoo Bagan M.E. School on 1.1.1980 by the Managing Committee of the school while the petitioner No. 2 was appointed as Assistant Teacher of Jayashree Shramik M.E. School on 1.4.1984 by the Managing Committee of the school. They have been rendering their services in their respective schools till now. In due course, their schools came to be recognised by the respondent authorities, However, when the services of the teaching and non-teaching staffs were provincialized on 16.11.1991, the names of the petitioners were left out: only the services of four teachers and one Grade-IV came to be regularised. The respondent authorities subsequently took up the question of provincialization of the services of dropped teachers of different schools of Assam. As instructed, the respondent No. 3 (District Elementary Education Officer, Cachar) vide his letter dated 30.3.2001 forwarded the names of genuinely dropped and honorary teachers including the names of the petitioners in the prescribed manner by indicating that their names were approved from his end. However, no further action was taken by the respondent authorities for quite sometime. The respondent No. 3 again by his letter dated 8.2.2005 forwarded the list of dropped teachers including the names of the petitioners received by him from the Headmasters to the respondent No. 2.

(3.) A Screening Committee was thereafter constituted for considering the provincialisation of the services of the dropped teachers. The Headmaster of their school, according to the petitioners, appeared before the Screening Committee on 27.11.2005 and submitted the necessary papers, but nothing happened even thereafter. In the meantime, the Block Elementary Education Officer, Rajabazar (respondent 4) by his letter dated 8.9.2011 forwarded the joint application of the petitioners and one other person, with whom we are not presently concerned, to the respondent No. 2 indicating therein that one Dilip Kumar Paul was provincialized on 7.1.1994 and recommended the provincialisation of the services of the petitioners along with one other person. The respondent No. 3 apparently by his letter dated 19.11.2011 forwarded the list of dropped teachers including the names of the petitioners to the respondent No. 2 for necessary action, but no tangible result has been taken ti 11 now. The subsequent representations made by the petitioners to the respondent authorities also did not evoke any positive response. It is contended by the petitioners that the policy decision taken by the respondent authorities on 13.1.2003 as modified by this Court in its judgment in Jiban Chandra Deka & Ors. v. State of Assam & Ors.,2008 3 GauLT 229 for constituting a Committee for considering the cases of dropped teachers has not been followed in their cases, which prompted them to file this writ petition.