RANJANA ROY TALUKDAR Vs. STATE OF ASSAM

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Mr. A.R. Sikdar, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. J. Abedin, learned Standing Counsel, Education Department, Assam appearing on behalf of the respondent Nos. 1 and 2. As per office note dated 06.09.2013, the notices had been issued upon the respondent Nos. 3 and 4 by registered post, which had been received back, and as such, the order provides that the matter is ready as regards service. In spite of such service of notice, no one has appeared on behalf of the respondent Nos. 3 and 4.

(2.) The petitioner having passed her B.A. Examination in the year 1985 and the B.Ed examination in the year 1992, was initially appointed on 19.10.1993 as Normal Instructor, Basic Training Centre, Diphu on ad-hoc basis in the pay scale of Rs.1185/- - 2395/- per month and other allowances, initially for a period of four months against the vacant post of Sri Deben Dutta. The appointment of the petitioner was extended from time to time by various orders and by the order dated 07.10.1994, issued by the Director, SCERT, Assam, the petitioner was transferred to the Basic Training Centre, Golokganj in the same capacity. It is also the case of the petitioner that before she was transferred from Diphu to Golokganj, the petitioner was invited for a selection of regular appointment in the post held by her vide call letter dated 12.07.1994. Although the petitioner appeared in the interview and performed well, but the result of the interview was not informed to the petitioner. But, nevertheless, she was transferred to the Basic Training Centre, Golokganj and allowed to continue to serve in the same capacity. Subsequently, she was also attached as a Programme Officer to the District DPEP, Dhubri, which was on a deputation and she was allowed to draw the graduate scale of pay and deputation allowance as applicable.

(3.) It is the case of the petitioner that in the meantime, the post of Graduate Instructor in the Basic Training Centre, Golokganj had fallen vacant and the petitioner upon considering herself that she is duly qualified for being promoted to the said post, had submitted a representation on 22.01.2004. Although no formal order was issued in the representation, but she was orally intimated by the officials in the office of the Director of SCERT, Assam that her service as Normal Instructor has not been regularized and therefore, in order to be considered for promotion, her service has to be regularized. It is informed that thereafter the petitioner was regularized as a Normal Instructor w.e.f. 27.09.2007 along with 33 other employees, vide the order under Memo No.SCERT/ESSTT/AD-HOC/184/2001/310 dated 04.09.2013.