TARAK CHANDRA SHARMA Vs. STATE OF ASSAM

JUDGEMENT

(1.) In this application under Article 226 of the Constitution the petitioner has prayed for issuance of appropriate writ or direction and has also prayed for a direction to the respondents to pay monetary compensation.

(2.) The facts of the case may be stated as follows : Petitioner was selected for service as teacher in Fizi under the Cultural and Technical Co-operation programme of the Government of India and the Personnel Department of the Government of India communicated to the 3rd respondent that the petitioner had been selected for such appointment. He was released on lien. Pursuant to that the petitioner joined Penang Sangam High School, Raki-Raki, Fizi. He completed 3 years service as teacher. After completion of the said, period he was given an option to serve for another 3 years. He accepted the: same, but the Government of India did not extend the period and accordingly the petitioner returned and rejoined in Panbazar Girls High School. Thereafter, the petitioner was again offered the job of teacher in Bonthe Vocational Secondary School, Seirra Leon, West Africa. Accordingly, he applied to the Director of Public Instruction to release him on lien. He also requested the Secretary to the Government of Assam, Education Department. The Government, thereafter, granted lien to the petitioner and he was released. Pursuant to that the petitioner left for West Africa to join in St. Joseph Vocational Secondary School, Bonthe retaining his lien in his original post at Panbazar Girls H.E. School. As the Government of Sierra extended the period of this service for another 2 years, the petitioner requested the Government to extend his lien. However, there was no reply from the Government. The petitioner completed the extended period of 2 years and thereafter he returned home and went to join in his post at Panbazar Girls High School. However, the 3rd respondent advised the petitioner to obtain necessary orders from the Director of Public Instruction. He requested the Director of Public; Instruction to allow him to join, but he did not receive any reply. Accordingly, the petitioner approached the Addl. D.P.I, who informed him that his case would be sent to the Government for necessary approval. He continued to enquire about the decision of. the Government regarding his joining However, no information was given. Thereafter, the petitioner submitted Annexure-X letter dated 2.11.84. There was no reply. The petitioner made enquiries. However, he was not given any information regarding the decision of the Government. He continued to submit representations to various authorities. On 22.1.93 the petitioner also submitted a represented (sic, representation) to the Minister, Education and the Government by Annexure-XV letter dated 28.4.93 directed the 2nd respondent to furnish a detailed report. No report, however, was submitted to the Government. Again on 23.9.93 by Annexure-XVI the petitioner requested the Government to expedite the matter. Even then also nothing was done. By that time the petitioner attained the age of superannuation. Situated thus the petitioner has approached this Court by filing this petition.

(3.) All the respondents have entered appearance through the learned Government Advocate. However, no counter affidavit has been filed. Record has also not been produced. The case was heard yesterday. As Mr. Banerjee, learned Government Advocate was not in a position to make any submission, the case was adjourned till today to enable: the Government Advocate to receive instruction and produce record. Mr. Banerjee, learned Government Advocate today informs this Court that he is not in a position to produce the record. He contacted the Director, Secondary Education over phone and in reply the Director informed that the case was finally dealt with by the Commissioner and Secretary to the Government of Assam, Education Department and therefore, the matter ended there.