AJOY CHOUDHURY Vs. STATE OF ASSAM

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Dr. R. Sarmah, learned counsel for the petitioners. Also heard Mr. P.N. Sarma, learned standing counsel for the respondent No. 1, being the authority in the Elementary Education Department and Mr. B. Choudhury, learned standing counsel for the respondent Nos. 2 to 18, being the authorities in the SSA.

(2.) In this petition, under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioners have challenged the notification dtd. 14/12/2017, issued by the respondent No. 3, insofar as the same is pertinent to the infringement of the fundamental as well as constitutional rights of the petitioners, as the said respondent has created two separate categories of the same post and same cadre without having any justified reason, depriving the petitioners of their legitimate rights and dues, despite knowing it well that such illegal and unauthorized acts on their part are violative of fundamental and other legal rights of the petitioners and are also violative of Article 39(d) of Constitution of India and the provisions of the Service Regulations and Financial Regulations, 2003 of Axom Sarba Siksha Abhijan Mission, Assam; and also for setting aside and quashing the resolution (decision), if any, which was purportedly adopted by the respondent No. 2 (as reflected in the impugned notification dtd. 14/12/2017); and also to issue direction to the respondent authorities for carrying out necessary amendment/correction in the so-called ROP, 2017.

(3.) The background facts, leading to filing of the present petition, are briefly stated as under: