Page No.# 1/5 GAHC010197282017 2025:GAU-AS:9197 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : WP(C)/3427/2017 PRAMOD DEKA S/O- SIDHESWAR DEKA, PERMANENT R/O- KHATA DHAMDHAMA, P.O- BARBARI, P.S AND DIST- NALBARI, ASSAM, PIN- 781351, PRESENTLY RESIDING AT C/O- SRI KRISHNA SARMA NEAR SHIVA MANDIR, BEHIND JUDICIAL COLONY, P.S- CHANDMARI, GUWAHATI- 781003, KAMRUP METRO, ASSAM VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM and 3 ORS. REP. BY THE COMMISSIONER AND SECY. TO THE GOVT OF ASSAM, JUDICIAL DEPTT., DISPUR, GUWAHATI- 781006, KAMRUPM, ASSAM 2:THE REGISTRAR GENERAL HON'BLE GAUHATI HIGH COURT GUWAHATI KAMRUP METRO ASSAM PIN- 781001 3:THE REGISTRARADMINISTRATION IN CHARGE OF THE CENTRALISED RECRUITMENT GAUHATI HIGH COURT GUWAHATI- 781001 KAMRUP METRO ASSAM PIN- 781001 4:THE DISTRICT and SESSIONS JUDGE KAMRUP METRO AT GUWAHATI PIN- 781001 ASSA Page No.# 2/5 For the petitioner (s) : Mr. Y. N. Mahanta, Advocate For the respondent (s) : Mr. D. Nath, Sr. Govt. Advocate Mr. H. K. Das, SC. GHC BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DEVASHIS BARUAH Date of Hearing : 17.07.2025 Date of Judgment : 17.07.2025 JUDGMENT AND ORDER (ORAL) Heard Mr. Y. N. Mahanta, the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner. Mr. D. Nath, the learned counsel appears on behalf of the respondent No.1 and Mr. H. K. Das, the learned counsel appears on behalf of the respondent Nos.2, 3 & 4. 2. The petitioner herein is aggrieved by the order dated 31.03.2016 by which the petitioner’s request for regularization of his service was rejected. It is relevant to take note of that the petitioner was discharged from service w.e.f. 31.03.2016. 3. During the course of the hearing on 27.01.2025, the counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner drawing the attention to the affidavit filed by the respondent Nos.2, 3 & 4 submitted that the reason why the petitioner's case was rejected was on the ground Page No.# 3/5 that the petitioner had not passed Class VIII which is incorrect taking into account that the petitioner had passed Class VIII and he was reading in Class IX when he took a transfer certificate from a school in the name and style of Dokoha High School. The learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner drew the attention of this Court to the affidavit-in-reply filed by the petitioner on 26.11.2019, and more particularly, to Annexure- R- A which is the transfer certificate. 4. Taking into account the same, this Court passed an order on 27.01.2025. Paragraph Nos.2, 3, 4 & 5 of the said order dated 27.1.2025 is reproduced herein under:- “2. It is seen that an affidavit has been filed by the Registrar of the Gauhati High Court wherein it has been stated that at that relevant point of time, there was no available vacancy. Additionally, it was also mentioned that the Petitioner did not have any formal education. To the said affidavit, a reply has been filed by the Petitioner to the effect that the Petitioner is Class-VIII passed inasmuch as when he was reading in Class IX when he took a Transfer Certificate from a school in the name and style of Dokoha High School. 3. It is seen from the said certificate that the said certificate was issued on 06.10.2015 stating inter alia that the Petitioner left the school on 31.12.1989. It further appears from the said Transfer Certificate that the said school was only established in the year Page No.# 4/5 1987. 4. This Court has put a specific query upon the learned counsel for the Petitioner as to where the Petitioner was studying prior to that inasmuch without a Transfer Certificate from any other school, the Petitioner could not have been admitted in the said school which was only established in the year 1987. 5. Mr. A. Chamuah, the learned counsel for the Petitioner submits that he would take instructions in that regard and seeks 3 (three) weeks time.” 5. The record reveals that though this Court had given almost six months time, the petitioner has not been able to produce any document to show that the petitioner was transferred from some school to Dokoha High School in as much as the Dokoha High School was only established in the year 1987 and it is seen that the petitioner was issued the transfer certificate on 06.10.2015. 6. It appears that inspite of opportunity being provided, as the petitioner failed to produce the certificate on the basis of which the petitioner was admitted to the Dokoha High School, the authenticity of the transfer certificate dated 06.10.2015 is doubtful, and as such, it is therefore the opinion of this Court that on the basis of the said transfer certificate, the petitioner cannot be considered that he had passed Class VIII. 7. Under such circumstances, the reason so assigned by the Page No.# 5/5 respondent Nos.2, 3 & 4 in their affidavit-in-opposition for rejection of the petitioner’s claim for regularization of service appears to be in accordance with law. 8. Accordingly, this Court therefore does not find any merit in the instant writ petition for which the writ petition stands dismissed. JUDGE Comparing Assistant