PRADIP KR PATHAK Vs. STATE OF ASSAM

JUDGEMENT

(1.) AGGRIEVED by the resolution dated 28. 6. 2007 of the Governing Body of the Bilasipara College, Dhubri (hereafter referred to as the College) deciding to handover the charge of the Office of the Principal thereof to the respondent No. 4, the petitioner has projected this challenge thereto seeking redress. This Court while issuing notice on 20. 7. 2007 in the interim restrained the Director of Higher Education, Assam, from according approval to the said resolution.

(2.) I have heard Mr. T. C. Chutia, learned Counsel for the petitioner, Ms. Mary Gogoi, learned Standing Counsel, Education Department, Mr. A. K. Goswami, Sr. Advocate, assisted by Mr. S. Banik, Advocate for the respondent No. 3 and Mr. A. K. Sharma, learned Counsel for the respondent No. 4.

(3.) THE pleaded facts forming the factual background are essential. The petitioner's version is that he is a Lecturer in the Department of Mathematics in the College since 2. 3. 1976 and in recognition of his seniority in service, competence and ability, he has in the meantime been entrusted with the charge of the Office of the Principal thereof for short stints as and when called for. His services have also been requisitioned by the Higher Secondary Education Council and Gauhati University from time to time as Supervisory Officer etc. in different examinations conducted by them. The petitioner has stated that the Principal-in-Charge and Secretary of the College Mr. M. R. Sheikh was scheduled to retire on superannuation on 30. 6. 2007, the Governing Body held a meeting on 28. 6. 2007 and adopted two resolutions being Resolution No. 8 (a) and 8 (b ). While by the first, Mr. M. R. Sheikh's retirement on superannuation was recorded, by the second, the Governing Body noticed that the next senior most Lecturer Mrs. B. Patgiri, Head of Department, Philosophy, had expressed her disinclination to assume the charge of the Office of the Principal. In course of the discussion to select the next senior most Lecturer it decided against the petitioner on the grounds enumerated therein. The Governing Body instead recommended the name of respondent No. 4 to be the Principal-in-Charge and Secretary of the College.