Page No.# 1/8 GAHC010027622020 undefined THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : WP(C)/1109/2020 ASMAT ALI SK. S/O- OSMAN ALI SK, VILL KISMAT HASDAHA PART IV, P.O- KISMAT HASDAHA, P.S AND DIST- DHUBRI, ASSAM, PIN- 783334 VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM AND 7 ORS REP. BY THE COMMISSIONER AND SECRETARY TO THE GOVT OF ASSAM, EDUCATION DEPTT, DISPUR, GUWAHATI- 06 2:THE DIRECTOR OF ELEMENTARY EDUCATION ASSAM KAHILIPARA GUWAHATI- 19 3:THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER DHUBRI P.O AND DIST- DHUBRI PIN- 783301 4:THE DEEO DHUBRI P.O AND DIST- DHUBRI PIN-783301 5:THE DISTRICT MISSION COORDINATOR SARVA SIKSHA ABHIJAN DHUBRI P.O AND DIST- DHUBRI ASSAM PIN- 783301 Page No.# 2/8 6:THE BEEO GLOKGANJ P.O AND DIST- DHUBRI ASSAM PIN- 783301 7:THE INSPECTOR OF SCHOOLS DHUBRI P.O AND DIST- DHUBRI ASSAM PIN- 783301 8:NUR ZAMAL HOQUE S/O- ANOWAR ALI THE PRESIDENT OF THE SCHOOL MANAGING COMMITTEE OF THE PUB KISMAT HASDAHA NADARU SK LP SCHOOL P.O- KISMAT HASDAHA P.S AND DIST- DHUBRI ASSAM PIN- 78333 Advocate for the Petitioner : MR A RAHMAN, MR E HUSSAIN Advocate for the Respondent : GA, ASSAM, MR B N SARMA Elementary Education Deptt. ,SC, ELEM. EDU,SC, SSA,MR. M ISLAM,MD J ALOM,MR. M DUTTA BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE N. UNNI KRISHNAN NAIR ORDER Date : 17-06-2026 Heard Mr. A. Rahman, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. B. Kaushik, learned standing counsel, Elementary Education, Assam appearing for the respondent Nos. 1, 2, 4, 6 & 7, Mr. G. Bokoliyal, learned Govt. Advocate, Assam appearing for the respondent No. 3, Mr. S. Bora, learned standing counsel, SSA for respondent No. 5 and Mr. M. Ali, learned counsel for respondent No. 5. 2. The petitioner in the present writ petition has presented a challenge to the order Page No.# 3/8 dated 03-01-2020, by which, the petitioner was removed from the responsibility of Head Teacher-cum-Member Secretary of the School Managing Committee of Pub Kismat Hasdaha Nadaru Sk. L.P. School, basing on certain complaints raised against him in the matter. The petitioner was, thereafter, posted as the Assistant Teacher of the School. 3. As projected in the writ petition, the petitioner was appointed as the Head Teacher of Pub Kismat Hasdaha Nadaru Sk. L.P. School by the School Managing Committee (SMC), at the venture stage of the School, on 30-07-1999. The services of the teachers working in the School, including that of the petitioner on being considered under the Assam Venture Educational Institution (Provincialisation of Services) Act, 2011, came to be provincialized vide issuance of an order dated 19-12-2013. The petitioner was so provincialized by also denoting him to be the Head Teacher of the said School. The petitioner being the Head Teacher of the School was also the Member Secretary of the SMC. It is projected that certain amounts were sanctioned to the School for construction of additional class rooms and the execution of the works involved was under progress. It is submitted that the President of the SMC and the School along with certain other members had raised certain illegal demands before the petitioner and he not complying with the same, allegations came to be leveled against him with regard to misappropriation of money allotted for mid-day meal scheme as well as the amounts sanctioned for construction of additional class rooms. Thereafter, vide a communication dated 30-12- 2019 the District Project Engineer, SSA, Dhubri directed the Block Elementary Education Officer-cum-Block Mission Coordinator, SSA, to require the President, the Vice President and the Member Secretary of the School in question to appear before the Addl. Deputy Page No.# 4/8 Commissioner and District Mission Coordinator, SSA, Dhubri on 02-01-2020 along with the up-to-date SMC bank account book, SMC resolution book and other relevant documents. The petitioner did not appear before the Addl. Deputy Commissioner, Dhubri in terms of the directions passed by the District Project Engineer, SSA, Dhubri vide the communication dated 30-12-2019, inasmuch as, the said communication was received by the petitioner only on 06-01-2020. 4. Poised thus, the District Elementary Education Officer (DEEO), Dhubri proceeded to issue an order dated 03-01-2020, and therein by reckoning an enquiry report submitted by the Block Elementary Education Officer (BEEO), Golokganj, proceeded to degrade the petitioner as Assistant Teacher and also removed him from the responsibility as Member Secretary of the School Managing Committee (SMC) of the School, in question, on the ground of disobeying orders of higher authority, anomalies of mid-day meal, construction of school building and negligence of duty. The next senior most Assistant Teacher was directed to act as the Head Teacher-cum-Member Secretary of the School, in question, with immediate effect. 5. Being aggrieved, the petitioner had submitted a representation dated 29-01-2020, praying for review of the said order dated 03-01-2020. The said prayer of the petitioner, not being considered, the petitioner has instituted the present writ petition. 6. Mr. Rahman, learned counsel for the petitioner, by reiterating the facts noticed, hereinabove, has submitted that although the petitioner was required vide the communication dated 30-12-2019, to appear before the Addl. Deputy Commissioner, Dhubri on 02-01-2020, admittedly the said communication being received by the Page No.# 5/8 petitioner, only on 06-01-2020, he was not in a position to appear before the jurisdictional Addl. Deputy Commissioner, as directed. He submits that the BEEO on his own motion had proceeded to prepare a report in the matter without hearing the petitioner. Mr. Rahman further submits that no show-cause notice came to be issued to the petitioner alleging commission of any mis-conduct by him in the matter. It is further submitted that the BEEO is not the Disciplinary Authority of the petitioner and accordingly, any show- cause notice issued by him, would have the effect of an explanation being called from the petitioner and not one instituting a disciplinary proceeding against him. Mr. Rahman by referring to the order dated 03-01-2020 has submitted that the same was so issued without affording an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner. He submits that the petitioner in the event was granted an opportunity of hearing, he would have clarified the purported complaints lodged against him by the President and other members of the SMC of the School. Accordingly, Mr. Rahman submits that the order dated 03-01-2020, being so issued in clear violation of the principles of natural justice, the same would mandate interference from this Court. 7. Mr. B. Kaushik, learned standing counsel, Secondary Education, Assam, submits that from the perusal of the order dated 03-01-2020, serious allegations have been found to have been levelled against the petitioner, and accordingly continuance of the petitioner as the Head Teacher and also as the Member Secretary of the SMC of the School in question was found to be not conducive to the interest of the School and the students studying in the said School. Mr. Kaushik, however, fairly submits that the said order dated 03-01-2020, is not found to have issued by the DEEO after the materials coming on Page No.# 6/8 record against the petitioner was not so placed before the petitioner, for his response. He submits that the said order can also not be treated as an order of suspension, because finality has been attached in the said order, which he fairly submits ought to have been so done after affording the petitioner an opportunity of hearing. 8. Mr. M. Ali, learned counsel for the respondent No. 8 submits that the respondent No. 8, is no longer functioning as the President of the SMC of the said School and accordingly, he would not place any arguments in the matter pertaining to the issue raised in the writ petition. 9. I have heard the learned counsel for the parties and have also perused the materials available on record. 10. The main grievance of the petitioner is to the effect that the order dated 03-01- 2020, was issued by the DEEO, Dhubri without affording to him an opportunity of hearing in the matter. It is projected that in the event there was complaints against the petitioner, an enquiry by affording an opportunity to the petitioner ought to have been carried out and thereafter, basing on the clarifications set out by the petitioner, necessary follow up action was permissible to be taken by the respondent authorities. 11. This Court has carefully perused the order dated 03-01-2020. A perusal of the same reveals that there were serious allegations levelled against the petitioner regarding commission of anomalies in the mid-day meal scheme implemented in the School, construction of additional class rooms etc. An enquiry report is also found to have been placed on record by the jurisdictional BEEO. This Court does not, however, find that the Page No.# 7/8 copy of the said enquiry report was furnished to the petitioner for receiving his response, thereto. Accordingly, this Court finds that the order dated 03-01-2020 has the effect of casting a stigma on the petitioner. The said order dated 03-01-2020 is found to have been passed basing on the materials collected behind the back of the petitioner without any involvement of the petitioner in such enquiries made. 12. This Court also finds that in the present writ petition, while issuing notices in the matter on 17-02-2020, had stayed the effect and operation of the order dated 03-01- 2020. However, for the last around 06 (six) years the Education Department is not found to be aggrieved by the said order, inasmuch as, no application for vacation of the said order nor any affidavit in the matter has been filed. 13. In view of the above position, this Court having found that the petitioner was imposed with a penalty, without affording to him an opportunity of hearing, proceeds to interfere with the order dated 03-01-2020. The order dated 03-01-2020, accordingly, stands set aside. 14. This Court further provides that the interference made by this Court with the order dated 03-01-2020, shall not bar the respondent authorities to proceed against the petitioner, in the event, there are materials available on record which discloses commission by him of any misconduct in the matter. The respondent authorities, in the event, is of the view that a Departmental Proceeding is to be instituted against the petitioner, it will also be open to them to also invoke the power vested in the Disciplinary Authority under Rule 6 of the Assam Service (Discipline and Appeal) Rules, 1964. Page No.# 8/8 15. Mr. B. Kaushik, learned standing counsel, Secondary Education, Assam is requested to download a copy of this order and forward the same to the departmental authorities for arriving at a decision, in terms of the directions passed by this Court in the matter. 16. With the above observations and directions, the present writ petition stands disposed of. JUDGE Comparing Assistant