RASMIREKHA BEGUM Vs. STATE OF ASSAM

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Mr. A.R. Bhuyan, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. C. Bhattacharya, learned Standing Counsel, Secondary Education appearing for the respondent Nos. 1, 2 and 3. Also heard Mr. P.K. Medhi, learned Govt. Advocate for the respondent Nos. 4 and 5. Mr. J. Ahmed, learned counsel appears for the respondent Nos. 6 and 7. Considering the grievances projected by the petitioner as well as the submissions advanced by the learned counsels for the parties, the case is taken up for disposal with their consent.

(2.) The petitioner was appointed as Sectional Teacher for Class-VIII on the recommendation of the Managing Committee of Hemanta Baruah H.E. Vidyapith for the said School vide Office Order dated 15.12.2004. Pursuant to her appointment, the petitioner joined her duties on 17.12.2004 in the forenoon. While she was working as such, the State Government in the Education (Elementary Department) vide Notification dated 31.12.2010 notified the integration of 8 year education cycle in the Elementary stage and consequently, Class-VIII was integrated with the upper primary stage, while Class-V was integrated at lower primary stage from the academic session of 2011.

(3.) The petitioner apprehending that her case for provincialization will not be considered in view of the integration, she approached this Court by filing WP(C) No. 6283/2011. The writ petition was disposed of vide order dated 05.06.2012, by taking the view that even if Class- VIII is integrated to upper primary education, the case of the petitioner can still be considered. Therefore, the challenge made to the notification dated 31.12.2010 by the writ petitioner was rejected. Consequently, the respondents were directed to consider the case of the petitioner for provincialization of her service as Section Teacher of Class-VIII in the upper primary elementary education as and when her turn came provided she deserved such consideration.