Page No.# 1/5 GAHC010075172025 2025:GAU-AS:4521 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : WP(C)/1999/2025 ANIL CHANDRA NATH HEAD MASTER DOLOICHUBA SECONDARY SCHOOL MARIGAON UNDER SUSPENSIOPN R/O VILLAGE NALBHETI, PO AND PS MARIGAON, DISTRICT MARIGAON, ASSAM 782105 VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM AND ORS REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY TO THE GOVT OF ASSAM, SECONDARY EDUCTATION DEPARTMENT, DISPUR, GUWAHATI, DISTRICT KAMRUP METRO, ASSAM 781006 2:THE MISSION DIRECTOR OF SAMGRA SIKSHA KAHILIPARA GUWAHATI DISTRICT KAMRUP METRO ASSAM 781019 3:THE DIRECTOR OF SECONDARY EDUCATION KAHIILIPARA GUWAHATI DISTRICT KAMRUP METRO ASSAM 781019 4:THE INSPECTOR OF SCHOOLS MARIGAON DISTRICT CIRCLE MARIGAON ASSAM 782105 5:THE DISTRICT COMMISSIONER MARIGAON ASSAM 782105 Page No.# 2/5 6:THE TREASURY OFFICER MARIGAON ASSAM 78210 Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. R SARMA, N SARMAH,MS. S D SAIKIA Advocate for the Respondent : GA, ASSAM, SC, SSA,SC, SEC. EDU. BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MICHAEL ZOTHANKHUMA ORDER 10.04.2025 Heard Mr. R. Sarma, learned counsel for the petitioner, who submits that the petitioner was appointed as an Assistant Teacher at Surjya Bora Girls’ High School, Morigaon on 01.06.2001 and then rationalized at Doloichuba High School vide order dated 07.08.2023. He was then allowed to hold the charge of Headmaster w.e.f. 01.09.2023. 2. The petitioner’s counsel submits that the petitioner was thereafter issued a show-cause notice dated 23.12.2024 under the Assam Services (Discipline and Appeal) Rules, 1964 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the 1964 Rules), as to why any of the penalties prescribed in Rule 7 of the 1964 Rules should not be inflicted upon the petitioner. The charges framed against the petitioner, to which he had been asked to submit his reply, are as follows:- “Charge. No.1. Whereas, you have been serving as I/C Headmaster at Daloichuba High School and in the tenure of your service, it has come to the notice of the undersigned through news items published in the Assamese daily newspapers Agradoot and Asomiya Pratidin on 10-12-24 regarding allegations of sexual harassment against girl students of your school, Daloichuba High School. Page No.# 3/5 Charge No.2 Whereas a Magisterial enquiry was given by the District Commissioner, Morigaon in this regard vide letter no. MMJ.20/2024/3, dtd.23/12/2024 and the report of the same is received today vide letter no.EDU/88/2024-R&R- MRG/120829, dtd.23/12/2024, which reveals that you are not having congenial relationship with the teachers and students. Besides, as alleged by the guardians, you are having some indecent behaviour, which is against the conduct of service rules as the Head of the institution. Charge No.3 Whereas it is mentioned in the enquiry report that a hue and cry situation created by a lady teacher on 27/11/24 in the school campus causing a disturbing situation. This was not reported to the higher authority. This proves willful negligence of duties from your part as entrusted to you as a public servant. Charge No.4 Whereas, such actions constitute a violation of service conduct rules and are unlawful and this demonstrates insincerity and a lackadaisical attitude toward the responsibilities entrusted to you as a teacher of the school. Charge No.5 Whereas, this kind of incident has tarnished the reputation of the school in particular and the department as a whole, which is intolerable and is not condonable.” 3. The petitioner submitted his reply to the show-cause notice on 27.12.2024, by denying all the charges framed against him. Thereafter, the Inspector of Schools, Morigaon issued the impugned order dated 27.12.2024, suspending the petitioner and holding that he was to get subsistence allowance during the said period. 4. The petitioner’s counsel submits that the petitioner submitted an appeal Page No.# 4/5 dated 02.01.2025 to the Secretary to the Government Assam, against the impugned order dated 27.12.2024 passed by the Inspector of Schools, Morigaon, praying that the impugned order should be set aside and the petitioner should be allowed to rejoin his services. The petitioner’s counsel submits that the petitioner’s appeal has not been decided till date and neither has any subsistence allowance been given to the petitioner. 5. Mr. S.M.T. Chistie, learned counsel for the Secondary Education Department (Respondent Nos.1, 3 & 4) submits that there is nothing to show that the Appeal dated 02.01.2025, which has been annexed to the writ petition has been submitted to the respondent No.1. He submits that as the Director is the Appellate Authority and the appointing authority of the petitioner, the appeal should have been submitted to the Director of Secondary Education. He however submits that if an appeal is submitted by the petitioner, the same would be decided by the respondent No.3. 6. Mr. B. Chowdhury, learned counsel appears for the respondent No.2; Mr. P. Saikia, learned counsel appears for the respondent No.5 and Ms. R.M. Baruah, learned counsel appears for the respondent No.6. 7. On considering the fact that the petitioner’s appeal has not been decided by the respondent No.1 and keeping in view the fact that the Director of Secondary Education is the appointing authority, this writ petition is disposed of at the motion stage itself, with liberty being given to the petitioner to file an appeal against the order dated 27.12.2024 passed by the Inspector of Schools, Morigaon to the Director of Secondary Education. The same should be filed within a period of 2(two) weeks from today. The Director of Secondary Education shall thereafter take a decision on the petitioner’s appeal, within a period of 4(four) weeks from the date of receipt of the petitioner’s appeal, Page No.# 5/5 which shall be accompanied by a copy of the writ petition along with a copy of this order. In the meantime, the respondents shall ensure that the petitioner is paid his subsistence allowance from the date of his suspension, if not paid earlier. JUDGE Comparing Assistant