High Court · 2012

Heard Mr. AM Buzarbaruah, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner. Also hea rd Mr. N Sarma, learned Standing counsel, Education Department, Assam for the re spondents. Considering the grievance raised and as agreed to by the learned counsel appearing for the parties, this writ petition is being disposed of at the motio n stage itself. Petitioners’ case in brief is that the petitioner was appointed as Lower Division Assistant (in short LDA) in the Pestirpar High Madrassa as per the res olution No.3 dated 03.06.2001 of the Managing Committee of the said Madrassa on a temporary basis. Accordingly an appointment letter was issued by the responden t authority in favour of the petitioner. Consequently the petitioner joined in t he post of LDA with a joining letter dated 04.06.2001 and since then the petitio ner has been discharging his duties as LDA in the said Madrassa continuously or without any break till date to the satisfaction of all concerned. That prior to the resolution No.3 dated 03.06.2001 appointing the petitioner as LDA, the Manag ing Committee of the said Madrassa by another resolution being resolution No.1 d ated 03.06.2001 resolved to appoint respondent No.7 as LDA in the said Madrassa. But no appointment letter was issued in favour of respondent No.7. At that rele vant point of time, the Pastirpar High Madrassa was at venture stage and the pre vailing norms of the venture institutions required a financial implication to be satisfied by all such appointees to the institution. The respondent No.7 did no t agree to such financial implication and refused to pay the necessary contribut ion towards the venture institution. Consequent to such unwillingness to contrib ute the financial contribution, the respondent No.7 refused to accept the appoin tment. Consequently, no appointment letter as LDA was issued in favour of respon dent No.7 as per resolution No.1 dated 03.06.2001. On such refusal, the Managing Committee of the Pestirpar High Madrassa adopted a subsequent resolution No.3 d ated 03.06.2001 whereby the petitioner was appointed as LDA. The appointment of the petitioner as LDA was provisionally approved by order dated 27.02.2004 under the signature of the Inspector of Schools, Dhubri. On the other hand, the appoi ntment of the respondent No.7 as Grade-IV (peon) was also provisionally approved by the said authority by its order dated 26.06.2008 (27.06.2008). The Madrassa where the petitioner is working had obtained Government rec ognition in the year 2002 with effect from 2001. The said Madrassa was selected for financial assistance under the scheme adopted by the Government for the year 2009-10. Accordingly the Madrassa had been provided the financial assistance fo r the first time in the year 2010. Consequently petitioner had received his shar e at an amount of Rs.8000/- for the post of LDA and the respondent No.7 received an amount of Rs.6000/- for the post of Grade IV (peon) on 31.05.2010 respective ly. Again the Madrassa had obtained financial assistance for the year 2011. The petitioner had received his share of financial assistance for his service as LDA on 29.04.2011 along with other staff. But the respondent No.7 did not get the s ame because his post was not covered for financial assistance under the scheme o f State Plan for the year 2010-11. The respondent No.7 had never raised any grie vance against the service of the petitioner as LDA in the Madrassa till the year 2011 but the respondent No.7 had raised the same for the first time in 2011 by submitting a representation dated 19.05.2011 before the respondent authority whe n his post had not been covered under the scheme of financial assistance for the year 2011. The Madrassa has also been proposed for provincialisation under the Assam Venture Educational Institutions (Provincialisation of services) Act, 2011 and therefore a list of particulars of teaching and non-teaching staff has been submitted before the concerned authority including the name of the petitioner a s LDA of the Madrassa. But as the post of the respondent No.7 is not covered und er the Act, 2011 and therefore his name has been dropped from the said list. Being not entitled to the financial assistance in the year 2011 and bein g aggrieved by non-disposal of the representation dated 19.05.2011, the responde nt No.7 had preferred a writ petition being WP(C) No.4126/2011 inter alia claimi ng that the respondent No.7 was appointed as LDA in the Pestirpar High Madrassa on 01.08.2001 and accordingly he joined on 02.08.2001 and since then he has been working as LDA in the Madrassa which is incorrect and contrary to the records. However, the said writ petition was disposed of with a direction to the responde nt No.3 to examine the grievances of the respondent No.7 and necessary enquiry b y affording opportunity of hearing not only to the respondent No.7 but also to t he respondent No.5 and the present petitioner. As per the direction of this Cour t, the Inspector of Schools, Dhubri called both the parties for hearing. Thereaf ter the respondent No.3 had passed the impugned order dated 23.03.2012 without c onsidering the resolution No.1 dated 22.07.2001 and the resolution dated 29.07.2 001 of the Managing Committee and also the appointment of the petitioner as LDA as well as the appointment of the respondent No.7 as Grade IV (peon) in the Madr assa. Being aggrieved, the petitioner had filed an appeal against the order da ted 23.03.2012 for cancellation/modification by submitting representations befor e the respondent authorities. In the meantime, the respondent No.7 had preferred another writ petition being WP(C) No.5004/2012. This Court vide order dated 16. 10.2012 disposed of the said writ petition with some directions to the responden t authorities. The petitioner had informed about the said order of this Court to the respondent authorities on 18.10.2012 and subsequently submitted representat ion before the respondent No.2 i.e., the Director, Secondary Education, Assam as well as respondent No.4, i.e., the District Scrutiny Committee for Secondary Ed ucation, represented by the Deputy Commissioner, Dhubri on 14.11.2012. However, the same have not been disposed of till date. Hence the instant writ petition fo r a direction to the aforesaid respondents to dispose of the representation with in a time frame. To the limited prayer so made, the learned counsel for the respondent ha s not raised any objection. Considering the matter in its entirety and the limited prayer so made, t he instant writ petition is disposed of with a direction to the appropriate auth ority i.e., Director of Secondary Education, Assam to dispose of the representat ion so submitted by the petitioner within a period of 6(six) weeks from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order. The petitioner shall submit a certified copy of this order with the anne xures appended thereto before the respondent No.2. It is further made clear that before passing any order, the respondent No.2 shall scrutinize the relevant rec ords regarding appointment, etc., of both the petitioner as well as respondent N o.7 and if necessary the respondent No.2 would hear the petitioner as well as th e respondent No.7 personally after giving notice to both the parties. Needless t o say that any order passed shall be communicated to the petitioner as well as r espondent No.7 in their given addresses forthwith. With the above direction, this writ petition stands disposed of. No cost s.