Page No.# 1/5 GAHC010261092024 2025:GAU-AS:1628 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : WP(C)/6629/2024 ABU TAHER SK AND 3 ORS S/O- SOLIM UDDIN SHEIKH, VILLAGE- FULERCHAR PART III (SANTIPUR), P.O- HATSINGIMARI, P.S- SUKCHAR, DIST- SOUTH SALMARA MANKACHAR, ASSAM, PIN-783136, TUTOR-SANTIPUR ME MADRASSA 2: ROFIQUL ISLAM SHEIKH S/O- LATE SAHAB UDDIN SARKAR VILLAGE- FULERCHAR PART III (SANTIPUR) P.O- HATSINGIMARI P.S- SUKCHAR DIST- SOUTH SALMARA MANKACHAR ASSAM PIN-783136 3: ALEYA KHATUN W/O- ABDUL HYE MANDAL VILLAGE AND P.O- HATSINGIMARI P.S- SOUTH SALMARA DIST- SOUTH SALMARA MANKACHAR ASSAM PIN-783136 4: ABDUL LATIF MONDAL S/O- LATE SAMSER ALI MONDAL VILLAGE- FULERCHAR PART III (SANTIPUR) Page No.# 2/5 P.O- HATSINGIMARI P.S- SUKCHAR DIST- SOUTH SALMARA MANKACHAR ASSAM PIN-78313 VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM AND 5 ORS REPRESENTED BY THE CHIEF SECRETARY TO THE GOVERNMENT OF ASSAM, DISPUR, GUWAHATI- 781006. 2:THE SECRETARY TO THE GOVERNMENT OF ASSAM SCHOOL EDUCATION DEPARTMENT DISPUR GUWAHATI PIN- 781006. 3:THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY TO THE GOVERNMENT OF ASSAM FINANCE DEPARTMENT DISPUR GUWAHATI PIN- 781006. 4:THE DIRECTOR ELEMENTARY EDUCATION ASSAM GUWAHATI KAHILIPARA PIN- 781019. 5:THE DISTRICT ELEMENTARY EDUCATION OFFICER SOUTH SALMARA MANKACHAR P.O- HATSINGIMARI ASSAM PIN-783136 6:THE BLOCK ELEMENTARY EDUCATION OFFICER MANKACHAR BLOCK DIST-SOUTH SALMARA MANKACHAR P.O- HATSINGIMARI Page No.# 3/5 ASSAM PIN-78313 Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. M R KHANDAKAR, MR. A ROHMAN Advocate for the Respondent : SC, FINANCE, GA, ASSAM,SC, ELEM. EDU BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ROBIN PHUKAN ORDER Date : 17.02.2025 Heard Mr. M.R. Khandakar, learned counsel for the petitioners. Also heard Mr. P.N. Sarma, learned Standing counsel for the respondent Nos. 2, 4, 5 and 6 and Mr. A. Chaliha, learned Standing counsel for the respondent No. 3. 2. This writ proceeding, under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, is instituted by four petitioners, namely, Abu Taher Sk., Rofiqul Islam Sheikh, Aleya Khatun and Abdul Latif Mondal, for directing the respondent authorities to take necessary steps to provide regular pay scale to the petitioners in terms of the judgment and order dated 04.10.2024, in WP(C) No. 2729/2019 (Mohor Ali Sheikh and 22 Ors. vs. the State of Assam and 7 Ors.). 3. Mr. Khandakar, learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the petitioners are working as Tutors in Santipur M.E. Madrassa (Santipur M.E. School), in the South Salmara Mankachar, since the year 1993 and their services were provincialised on 05.02.2021 w.e.f. 01.01.2021. Mr. Khandakar also submits that the petitioners have been receiving fixed pay salary and that similarly situated persons had preferred a writ petition, being WP(C) No. 2729/2019 and the said writ petition was disposed of, vide order dated 04.10.2024 and the present petition may also be disposed of by granting similar Page No.# 4/5 relief to the petitioners as provided to the petitioners in WP(C) No. 2729/2019. 4. Mr. Sarma, learned Standing counsel for the respondent Nos. 2, 4, 5 and 6 submits that he has no objection in the event of disposing of this petition by granting similar relief to the present petitioners like the petitioners in WP(C) No. 2729/2019. 5. Having heard the submissions of learned Advocates of both sides, I have carefully gone through the petition and the documents placed on record and also perused the judgment and order dated 04.10.2024, in WP(C) No. 2729/2019. 6. It appears that the aforesaid WP(C) No. 2729/2019 was disposed of vide judgment and order, dated 04.10.2024, with the following direction: “179. It is true that the courts cannot direct the legislature to enact law in a particular manner. However, in discharge of its statutory obligation the Government, in exercise of its Rule making power, will have a duty to frame Rules for proper implementation of the provisions of the Statute. While framing the Rules, the State will also be under a bounden duty to, not only to act in terms of the scheme of the Act but also to unflinchingly adhere to the Constitutional norms of equality. It will, therefore, be in the fitness of things that the State Government itself, in exercise of its Rule making power under section 23 of the Act, takes necessary steps to provide for a regular pay scale to the Tutors, which can even be commensurate to the pay structure indicated in the Schedule of the Governing Act. Such a measure, in our view, will restore the equality of treatment to this category of Teachers with the other Government employees and at the same time will not become burdensome to the exchequer. We, therefore, direct the respondents to initiate necessary steps in the matter, in Page No.# 5/5 the light of the observations made here-in-above, as expeditiously as possible, preferably within a period of 6 (six) months from today.” 7. Taking note of the judgment and order in WP(C) No. 2729/2019, and also taking note of the submissions of learned Advocates of both sides and as agreed upon, this Court is inclined to dispose of the writ petition by granting similar relief as granted to the petitioners vide judgment and order dated 04.10.2024, in WP(C) No. 2729/2019. 8. Accordingly, it is provided that the State respondents shall make a verification of the provincialisation orders of the petitioners and if it is found that the petitioners’ case and the case of the petitioners in WP(C) 2729/2019, is the same, the directions passed in paragraph No. 179 of the judgment and order dated 04.10.2024, passed in WP(C) 2729/2019, shall also be made applicable to the present petitioners also. 9. The entire exercise should be concluded within a period of 6 (six) months from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order. 10. In terms of above, this writ petition stands disposed of. JUDGE Comparing Assistant