JUDGMENT & ORDER : N. Unni Krishnan Nair. J. Heard Mr. M. Hussain, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Ms. H.Terangpi, learned Standing Counsel, Secondary Education Department appearing for the respondent nos. 1, 2 & 3 and Ms. R. B. Bora, learned Standing Counsel, BTC, appearing for the respondent nos. 4 & 5. 2. The petitioner, by way of instituting the present proceeding, has presented a challenge to an order dated 18.01.2018, by which, Bhawraguri M. E. School was amalgamated with Janata High School and therein, the name of the respondent no. 6 was reflected as the Headmaster of the amalgamated school. The petitioner has also assailed the speaking order dated 21.07.2018, issued by the Commissioner & Secretary to the Govt. of Assam, Elementary & Secondary School Department, rejecting the claim of the petitioner herein, for being appointed as the Headmaster of the amalgamated school. 3. The brief facts requisite for adjudication of the issue, arising in the present proceeding is noticed as under: - The petitioner, who was a graduate, was appointed as a Science Teacher at Bhawraguri M.E. School on 22.03.1993 in the graduate scale of pay. The petitioner, thereafter, acquired his B.Ed degree in the year 1997. The post of Headmaster in Bhawraguri M.E. School becoming vacant on the incumbent therein, proceeding on superannuation, the petitioner was allowed to hold the charge of the said post. Thereafter, the District Elementary Education Officer, Chirang, vide an order dated 07.11.2016; promoted the petitioner as the Headmaster of Bhawraguri M.E. School. While the petitioner was continuing as the Headmaster of Bhawraguri M.E. School, the respondent authorities, in terms of the “SIKSHA KHETRA” scheme as notified vide the OM dated 22.09.2016, arrived at a decision to amalgamate “Bhawraguri M.E. School” with “Janata High School”, which was located in the same campus. Accordingly, on completion of the requisite formalities, the Commissioner & Secretary to the Govt. of Assam, Elementary & Secondary School Department vide communication dated 18.01.2018, proceeded to amalgamate “Bhawraguri M.E. School” with “Janata High School”. On such amalgamation, it was provided that the name of the amalgamated school shall be “Janata High School”. The said communication, further, reflected the names of the incumbents holding various posts in the amalgamated school and therein, the name of respondent no. On such amalgamation, it was provided that the name of the amalgamated school shall be “Janata High School”. The said communication, further, reflected the names of the incumbents holding various posts in the amalgamated school and therein, the name of respondent no. 6, who was the Headmaster of the Janata High School, was also reflected as the Headmaster of the amalgamated school now coming into being. The petitioner, being aggrieved by the said order of amalgamation and further therein, denoting the respondent no. 6 to be the Headmaster of the amalgamated school, approached this Court by way of instituting WP(C) No. 885/2018, assailing the same. The Co-ordinate Bench of this Court, vide order dated 19.02.2018, was pleased to dispose of the said writ petition, directing the Commissioner & Secretary, Govt. of Assam, Elementary & Secondary School Department, to consider the representation dated 29.01.2018, submitted by the petitioner in the matter. The Commissioner & Secretary, Govt. of Assam, Elementary & Secondary School Department was also required to personal hearing to both the petitioner as well as the respondent no. 6 herein. The Commissioner & Secretary, Govt. of Assam, Elementary & Secondary School Department, in terms of the directions passed by the Co-ordinate Bench of this Court, vide order dated 19.02.2018 in WP(C) No. 885/2018, proceeded to consider the issue so arising in the matter and on such consideration, proceeded vide order dated 21.07.2018, to reject the claim made by the petitioner herein for being appointed as the Headmaster of the amalgamated school. Being aggrieved, the petitioner has instituted the present proceeding. 4. The learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that “Janata High School” was a Venture School and was provincialised in the year 2013, in terms of the “ The Assam Venture Educational Institutions (Provincialisation of Services) Act, 2011 ” (herein after referred as Act of 2011). It is submitted that the respondent no. 6 did not have the requisite educational qualification for being appointed as the Headmaster of a Secondary School, in terms of the provisions of the “ The Assam Secondary Education (Provincialisation) Service Rules, 2003 ” (herein after referred as the Act of 2003). It is submitted that the respondent no. 6 did not have the requisite educational qualification for being appointed as the Headmaster of a Secondary School, in terms of the provisions of the “ The Assam Secondary Education (Provincialisation) Service Rules, 2003 ” (herein after referred as the Act of 2003). It is further submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner, herein, having the requisite qualification in terms of Rule 14 of the said Rules of 2003 for being appointed as the Headmaster of a Secondary School, was required on amalgamation of the “Bhawraguri M.E. School” with “Janata High School”, to be so appointed as the Headmaster of the amalgamated school and an unqualified person like the respondent no. 6 herein, could not have been preferred for appointment as the Headmaster of the amalgamated school, ignoring the case of an eligible person like that of the petitioner, herein. Accordingly, the learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the impugned order of amalgamation dated 18.01.2018, to the extent that it denotes the respondent no. 6 as the Headmaster of the amalgamated school as well as the speaking order dated 21.07.2018, rejecting the claim of the petitioner herein, to be appointed as the Headmaster in question, would call for an interference by this Court. 5. Per contra, the learned counsel appearing for the State respondents has submitted that the amalgamation of the school in question was so made after the requisite formalities in this connection were so completed, including the consent so received from the Managing Committees of both “Bhawraguri M.E. School” as well as from “Janata High School” for carrying out such amalgamation. The learned counsel for the respondents has submitted that in terms of the provisions of the said “SIKSHA KHETRA” scheme, notified vide the OM dated 22.09.2016, more particularly, sub- paragraph-(7) of Paragraph-3 thereof, the Headmaster of the High School shall be required to be continued as the Headmaster of the amalgamated school in the event the highest school involved in the amalgamation is a high school. It was further contended that the Headmaster of a M.E. School, amalgamated with the High School, shall be re-designated as the Assistant Headmaster with the same pay scale whatever they were drawing and the post shall be held by the existing Headmaster of a M.E. School; and the incumbent concerned is not required to acquire the qualification for the post of Assistant Headmaster. 6. It is further submitted by the learned counsel for the respondents that the respondent no. 6 herein, was provincialised in his service under the provisions of the said Act of 2011, as a Headmaster of the School and the said provincialisation of the respondent no. 6 as the Headmaster of the school not being interfered with, the same continues to hold the field and accordingly, the claim made by the petitioner, herein, would not mandate acceptance by this Court. 7. In the above premises, the learned counsel appearing for the respondents has submitted that in view of the provisions of the “SIKSHA KHETRA” scheme, the claim made by the petitioner herein, would not mandate acceptance and accordingly, the writ petition is required to be dismissed. 8. I have heard the learned counsels appearing for the parties and also perused the materials available on record. 9. It is not disputed that the petitioner herein, was promoted as the Headmaster of Bhawraguri M.E. School and prior to his promotion, the petitioner was working as a Science Teacher in the said school. Further, the petitioner had also acquired the B.Ed qualification in the year 1997. The Govt. of Assam, in the Secondary Education Department, vide OM 22.09.2016, had formulated the “SIKSHA KHETRA” scheme for amalgamation and merger of different schools. In terms of the provisions of Paragraph-3 of the said scheme, all schools situated in the same campus shall be merged with the highest school and the name of the highest school, in which all the schools amalgamate, shall stand. Further, sub-Paragraph-(7) of Paragraph-3 of the “SIKSHA KHETRA” scheme provides that in the event of amalgamation of two schools, the highest school is a High School, the Headmaster of the High School shall continue after amalgamation as the Headmaster of the amalgamated school. Further, sub-Paragraph-(7) of Paragraph-3 of the “SIKSHA KHETRA” scheme provides that in the event of amalgamation of two schools, the highest school is a High School, the Headmaster of the High School shall continue after amalgamation as the Headmaster of the amalgamated school. It further provides that the post of Headmaster of a M.E. School shall be re-designated as a Assistant Headmaster with the same pay scale which they were drawing and the post shall be held by the existing Headmaster of the M.E. School, without requiring the incumbent concerned to acquire the qualification for the post of Assistant Headmaster. The provision of Sub-Paragraph-(7) of Paragraph-3 of the “SIKSHA KHETRA” scheme, being relevant, is extracted herein below: - “ (7) In the event the highest school is High School, the Headmaster of the High School shall continue after amalgamation. The post of Headmaster of ME School shall be re-designated as Assistant Headmaster with same pay scale whatever they drawing and the post shall be held by the existing Headmaster of the ME School without requiring the qualification for the post of Assistant Headmaster,. However, after cessation of the serves of such Assistant Headmaster, the vacancy shall be filled up from the candidates having requisite qualification as per procedure stipulated in the Service Rules in force.” 10. In the case on hand, the “Janata High School” was provincialised in the year 2013, under the said Act of 2011 and the services of the respondent no. 6 was so provincialised as the Headmaster of Janata High School. On such provincialisation of his services, the respondent no. 6 continued to serve in the said school as its Headmaster. The petitioner herein, at the relevant point of time, was promoted as the Headmaster of Bhawraguri ME School. On completion of the requisite formalities, the Govt. of Assam in the Secondary Education Department, vide communication dated 18.01.2018, proceeded to amalgamate “Bhawraguri ME School” with “Janata High School” and the name of the school, upon such amalgamation was named as the “Janata High School”. In the said communication dated 18.01.2018, the post figuring in both the “Janata High School” as well as the “Bhawraguri ME School”, on amalgamation, was held to be posts figuring in the amalgamated “Janata High School”. The post of Headmaster, in terms of the communication dated 18.01.2018, was reflected to be held by the respondent no. In the said communication dated 18.01.2018, the post figuring in both the “Janata High School” as well as the “Bhawraguri ME School”, on amalgamation, was held to be posts figuring in the amalgamated “Janata High School”. The post of Headmaster, in terms of the communication dated 18.01.2018, was reflected to be held by the respondent no. 6 in terms of the provisions of sub- paragraph-(7) of Paragraph-3 of the “SIKSHA KHETRA” scheme. The petitioner, being aggrieved, had approached this Court by way of instituting WP(C) No. 885/2018 and this Court had disposed of the said writ petition by order dated 19.02.2018; requiring the Commissioner & Secretary, Govt. of Assam, Secondary Education Department to consider the representation submitted in the matter by the petitioner. 11. The Commissioner & Secretary, Govt. of Assam, Secondary Education Department, upon consideration of the issue raised by the petitioner herein, proceeded vide order dated 21.07.2018, to reject the claim of the petitioner to hold the charge of the Headmaster in the amalgamated Janata High School. The conclusions drawn by the Commissioner & Secretary, Govt. of Assam, Secondary Education Department in the order dated 21.07.2018; being relevant, is extracted herein below: - “ Conclusion: From the above materials on records and considering the facts in place, the principles in para-(3) column-7 of the SIKSHA KHETRA, a scheme, for amalgamation and merger of different Schools located within the same campus or in nearby areas, is followed and it mandates, that, in the event the highest school is High School the Headmaster of the High School shall continue after amalgamation. In respect of the qualification of the respondent no. 6 Altaz Ali Ahmed, his provincialisation of his services was guided by the provisions in Clause 4(3) of the “The Assam Venture Educational Institutions (Provincialisation of Services) Act, 2011. This is issued in compliance of the order dated 05.01.2018 passed by the Hon’ble Gauhati High Court in WP(C) No. 885/2018.” 12. On a perusal of the conclusions drawn by the authority in the order dated 21.07.2018; it would be revealed that the claim of the petitioner was rejected on the ground that in terms of sub-Paragraph-(7) of Paragraph-3 of the “SIKSHA KHETRA” scheme, the Headmaster of the High School concerned, shall continue as the Headmaster of the amalgamated school. It has further provided that the qualification of the respondent no. It has further provided that the qualification of the respondent no. 6 for the purpose of provincialising his services, as the Headmaster of Janata High School, was so governed by the provisions of Clause-4(3) of the said Act of 2011. On a perusal of the said order dated 21.07.2018, this Court is of the considered view that the same is a reasoned one and the relevant factors have been taken into consideration by the authority in drawing the conclusions so extracted herein above and accordingly, no error is found with the conclusions so drawn by the authority in the order dated 21.07.2018. Consequently, the order dated 21.07.2018, would not mandate any interference. 13. Having held that the order dated 21.07.2018, would not mandate any interference, this Court, further notices that while the petitioner had presented a challenge to the order of amalgamation dated 18.01.2018; and the order dated 21.07.2018 in the present proceeding, the petitioner has not challenged the provisions of sub-Paragraph-(7) of Paragraph-3 of the “SIKSHA KHETRA” scheme, as notified vide the OM dated 22.09.2016 and has also not challenged the provincialisation of the services of the respondent no. 6 under the provisions of the said Act of 2011, as the Headmaster of the Janata High School. 14. In absence of a challenge to the provincialisation of the services of the respondent no. 6 as Headmaster of the Janata High School, this Court, is not called upon to examine the validity of such provincialisation. Further, the provisions of sub- Paragraph-(7) of Paragraph-3 of the “SIKSHA KHETRA” scheme not being under challenge, the same has to be applied in the matter and on application of the same, the provincialisation of the services of the respondent no. 6 as the Headmaster of the Janata High School having continued, there is no infirmity in the respondent authorities denoting the respondent no. 6 as the Headmaster of the amalgamated school vide the communication dated 18.01.2018, upon amalgamation of “Bhawraguri ME School” with “Janata High School”. 15. In view of the above conclusions reached, this Court, is of the considered view that the communication dated 18.01.2018, amalgamating the “Bhawraguri ME School” with “Janata High School and denoting the respondent no. 6 as the Headmaster of the amalgamated school, as well as the order dated 21.07.2018, passed by the Commissioner & Secretary, Govt. of Assam, Secondary Education Department, would not call for any interference. 16. 6 as the Headmaster of the amalgamated school, as well as the order dated 21.07.2018, passed by the Commissioner & Secretary, Govt. of Assam, Secondary Education Department, would not call for any interference. 16. Accordingly, in view of the above discussion, the present writ petition is held to be devoid of any merit and consequently, the same stands dismissed. However, there would be no order as to costs.