Research › Search › Judgment

Gauhati High Court · body

2017 DIGILAW 681 (GAU)

Ramendra Kumar v. State of Assam

2017-05-29

A.K.GOSWAMI

body2017
JUDGMENT AND ORDER : Arup Kumar Goswami, J. Heard Mr. B. Chetri, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. S.K. Ghosh, learned standing counsel, Education (Secondary) Department appearing for the respondent Nos. 1, 2 and 3. None appears for respondent No. 4 despite service of notice. 2. The petitioner responded to an advertisement dated 21.12.2013 for Teachers Eligibility Test ('TET') Examination for Mathematics for Post Graduate Teachers of Higher Secondary Education. The petitioner passed the TET with 62.5% marks. 3. The Secretary to the Government of Assam, Secondary Education Department issued an Office memorandum dated 19.2.2014 on the subject of "Guidelines for recruitment to the post of Post Graduate Teacher in provincialised Higher Secondary". The Office Memorandum was professedly issued with a view to ensure proper process for recruitment of the Post Graduate Teacher in provincialised Higher Secondary in strict compliance of Assam Secondary Education (Provincialised) Service Rules, 2003, ['2003 Rules, (as amended)']. 4. The respondent No. 4, in terms of the Office Memorandum dated 19.2.2014, issued an advertisement on 13.6.2014 for TET qualified teacher for filling up one post of Subject Teacher in Dinjoy HM & HS School, Chabuah in Mathematics, which was reserved for OBC category. The petitioner belongs to OBC category and as he fulfilled the criteria laid down, submitted his candidature. He was selected for the post of Post Graduate Teacher of Mathematics and subsequently, on being required by the Inspector of Schools of Dibrugarh Circle, the petitioner also submitted an undertaking dated 22.7.2014 that he was willing to join in Dinjoy HM & HS School, Chabuah and that he would not join in any other school. 5. On 28.7.2014, the Government of Assam in the Education (Secondary) Department had added clause (7)(viii) to the Office Memorandum dated 19.2.2014, which is as follows : "No candidate is allowed to apply in the Assamese medium schools if the combination of subjects in HSLC Exam does not include the subject Assamese as MIL." 6. On 3.12.2014, the respondent No. 2 published a list of selected candidates for the post of Post Graduate Teachers where the name of the petitioner figured at Serial No. 19. In the remark column against the name of the petitioner it was observed as follows : "Post is blocked for clarification. The name of selected candidate appeared in the Mark-sheet/Certificate as Romendra Kumar but the DLAC as Ramendra Kr. Chapal." 7. In the remark column against the name of the petitioner it was observed as follows : "Post is blocked for clarification. The name of selected candidate appeared in the Mark-sheet/Certificate as Romendra Kumar but the DLAC as Ramendra Kr. Chapal." 7. Subsequently, the respondent No. 3 sent a corrigendum approved by the DLAC vide his letter dated 18.2.2015 indicating that the name of the selected candidate is Ramendra Kumar and not Ramendra Kumar Chapal. 8. During the course of arguments, Mr. Chetri has submitted that 'Chapal' is a name of the place, having a post office for the area in which the petitioner is a resident and the same was wrongly added as 'Chapal' after the surname of the petitioner. 9. Subsequently, an issue was raised by the respondent No. 2 vide order dated 18.2.2015 to the effect that the petitioner could not be appointed as Post Graduate Teacher in Mathematics as the medium of instruction of the petitioner in HSLC was not Assamese. 10. Later on, the respondent No. 2 issued another notification on 6.10.2015 whereby direction was issued to Inspector of Schools to immediately start the process of selection for filling up the posts of Post-Graduate Teachers in different provincialised Higher Secondary Schools. Clause 8 of the said letter is relevant and the same is quoted herein below : "The Addendum issued vide Memo No. ASE.313/2013/65, dated 28.7.2014 should be deleted and cancelled as because indigenous candidates passing HSLC from English Medium Schools will be deprived and barred from participating in the selection process." 11. Thus, it appears that in the subsequent selection process for the posts of Post Graduate Teachers in different provincialized Higher Secondary Schools, the Addendum issued on 28.7.2014 was not enforced. 12. In view of the said letter dated 6.10.2015, the respondent No. 2 issued a letter to the Secretary of the Government of Assam, Education (Higher) Department indicating therein the withdrawal of the Addendum dated 28.7.2014 and, therefore, seeking grant of necessary approval on the matter for taking further necessary action from his end. 13. In response to the said letter, the Under Secretary to the Government of Assam in the Education (Secondary) Department wrote a letter to respondent No. 2 on 22.6.2016 directing the respondent No. 2 to take necessary action as per provisions of rules for appointment of Subject Teachers in provincialised schools. 14. 13. In response to the said letter, the Under Secretary to the Government of Assam in the Education (Secondary) Department wrote a letter to respondent No. 2 on 22.6.2016 directing the respondent No. 2 to take necessary action as per provisions of rules for appointment of Subject Teachers in provincialised schools. 14. As no step was taken towards appointment of the petitioner, this application is filed by the petitioner. 15. The petitioner was allowed to participate in the selection process pursuant to the advertisement dated 13.6.2014 as he was eligible in terms of the advertisement. It is also not in dispute that the petitioner was eligible in terms of 2003 Rules (as amended) and also in terms of the Office Memorandum 19.2.2014 prior to insertion of clause (viii) on 28.7.2014. The Addendum dated 28.7.2014 providing that a person will not be eligible to participate if he does not have the subject of Assamese as Modern Indian Language (MIL) in HSLC, was issued after the selection was over. 16. After the selection had taken place on the basis of advertisement fixing eligibility criteria, the authority cannot introduce a fresh element to the eligibility criteria thereby rendering a duly qualified selected candidate ineligible for appointment. That apart, it is also noticed that the very same Addendum had again been discontinued subsequently by letter dated 6.10.2015. 17. Considering the above, I am of the opinion that the petitioner has not been fairly treated and the action of the respondents is violative of Article 14 of the Constitution of India. 18. Accordingly, this writ petition is allowed directing the respondents to take necessary steps for issuing the order of appointment of the petitioner so that the petitioner can discharge his duties as Post Graduate Teacher in Mathematics in Dinjoy HM & HS School, Chabuah. 19. This will be done within a period of two weeks from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order.