DIPAMONI DEVI Vs. STATE OF ASSAM

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Ms. B. Bhuyan, learned counsel for the petitioner in WP(C) 5231/2013 and Mr. B. Purkayastha, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner in WP(C) 533/2014. Also heard Mr J. Abedin, learned Standing counsel, Secondary Education Department, appearing for the State respondents.

(2.) These two petitions are taken up together as the issues raised in these petitions are intrinsically linked. WP(C) 5231/2013 has been filed by the petitioner challenging an order dated 23.08.2013, passed by the Director of Secondary Education, Assam, by which the service of the petitioner as a Subject Teacher in Morigaon Girls' Higher Secondary School, Morigaon, was terminated on the ground that though the petitioner was found suitable and recommended for appointment to the post of Subject Teacher, she did not apply for appointment to the post of Subject Teacher in Morigaon Girls' Higher Secondary School, where she was appointed.

(3.) It is the case of the petitioner that pursuant to the advertisement issued by the department on 08.02.2003, the petitioner, being eligible for appointment to the post advertised, had applied for appointment as a Post-Graduate Teacher and the petitioner claims that she was placed in Sl. No. 14 in the merit list. The petitioner along with 33 others was recommended for appointment and, accordingly, appointment letters were issued on 06.04.2013 and the petitioner was appointed as a Post-Graduate Teacher in Morigaon Girls' Higher Secondary School. However, the petitioner claims that without giving any prior notice to the petitioner, the impugned Termination Order dated 23.08.2013 was issued by the Director of Secondary Education, Assam, on the ground that it was subsequently brought to the notice of the authorities that the petitioner had not submitted her application for appointment against the post in Morigaon Girls' Higher Secondary School though the recruitment process was school-specific. In other words, the selection process was undertaken with reference to school-wise vacancy and not State-wise vacancy and since the petitioner had not applied for appointment to the post in Morigaon Girls' Higher Secondary School, the question of her being appointed in the said school did not arise. Accordingly, it was held that the name of the petitioner was wrongly included in the select list for being appointed in Morigaon Girls' Higher Secondary School leading to cancellation of her appointment.