SHRI NIRMAL KAKATI Vs. STATE OF ASSAM

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Mr. R.M. Choudhury, the learned counsel for the petitioners. The respondents are represented by Mr. N. Sarma, the learned standing counsel for the Department of Elementary Education.

(2.) The challenge here is to the speaking order dated 04.02010 (Annexure-VII), whereby, the Director of Elementary Education, Assam (hereinafter referred to as the 'DEE') has rejected the petitioners' representation for arrear increment from Aug. 1995 to Aug. 2005. The teachers were found to have been illegally appointed by the S. Monoharan Committee, but subsequently they were adjusted/regularised against other vacant posts. The petitioners claim that they are entitled to annual increments from the date of joining service and not from the date of regularisation.

(3.) Although there are 3 petitioners in this case, the appointment order only of the 1st petitioner Nirmal Kakati is enclosed in the writ petition. The process of induction into service as can be seen from the appointment order does not inspire confidence since the appointments were never recommended by the Sub-Divisional Advisory Board as per norms. In fact the appointment was curiously made subject to approval of the Advisory Board.