Page No.# 1/6 GAHC010240912023 undefined THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : WP(C)/6265/2023 AJAHAR ALI S/O- LATE ABUL HUSSAIN, R/O- VILL.- BHERBHERIJHAR, P.O. CHAMUAKHAT, DIST. DARRANG, ASSAM VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM AND 9 ORS. TO BE REPRESENTED BY THE COMMISSIONER AND SECRETARY TO THE GOVERNMENT OF ASSAM, EDUCATION ELEMENTARY DEPARTMENT, DISPUR, GUWAHATI-6. 2:THE DIRECTOR ELEMENTARY EDUCATION ASSAM KAHILIPARA GUWAHATI-19. 3:THE DISTRICT ELEMENTARY EDUCATION OFFICER DARRANG DIST. DARRANG ASSAM 4:THE BLOCK ELEMENTARY EDUCATION OFFICER DALGAON- SIALMARI EDUCATION BLOCK P.O. DALGAON DIST. DARRANG ASSAM 5:THE MISSION DIRECTOR SARBA SIKSHA ABHIYAN KAHILIPARA GUWAHATI-19. Page No.# 2/6 6:THE DISTRICT MISSION CO-ORDINATOR SARBA SIKSHA ABHIYAN DARRANG DIST. DARRANG ASSAM 7:THE DISTRICT LEVEL SCRUTINY COMMITTEE FOR ELEMENTARY EDUCATION DARRANG DIST. DARRANG ASSAM TO BE REPRESENTED BY ITS CHAIRMAN -CUM- DEPUTY COMMISSIONER DARRANG DIST. DARRANG ASSAM 8:THE STATE LEVEL SCRUTINY COMMITTEE ASSAM TO BE REPRESENTED BY ITS CHAIRMAN -CUM- THE DIRECTOR ELEMENTARY EDUCATION ASSAM KAHILIPARA GUWAHATI-19 Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. M A I HUSSAIN, N ISLAM Advocate for the Respondent : SC, ELEM. EDU, SC, SSA BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ROBIN PHUKAN ORDER 24.11.2025 Heard Mr. M.A.I. Hussain, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. P.N. Sarma, learned standing counsel for the Elementary Education Department. 2. In this petition, under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner has challenged the order dated 16.07.2022, passed by the Director of Elementary Education (DEE hereinafter) and prayed for issuing direction to the Page No.# 3/6 respondent Nos. 1 & 2 to provincialise his service on the basis of the recommendation of the District Level Committee (DLC hereinafter). 3. The grievance of the petitioner is that he was initially appointed as Assistant Teacher, at Kawadanga ME Madrassa, on 18.06.1997 and he was taking classes of Assamese and Mathematics subject. Subsequently, on 06.02.2000, he was promoted to the post of Headmaster of the said school. In the meantime, the Government had introduced the Assam Education (Provincialisation of Services of Teachers and Re-Organization of Educational Institutions) Act, 2017 and after enactment of the said Act, the particulars of the said school along with the staffs were placed before the DLC and after scrutinizing the same as well as enrollment of students, the DLC had recommended the name of four teachers, for provincialisation of their services, including the name of the petitioner. But, when the services of the employees of the school were provincialised on 05.02.2021, the name of the petitioner was dropped and therefore, he had approached this Court by filing a writ petition, being W.P.(C) No. 6137/2021 and vide order dated 22.11.2021, a Coordinate Bench of this Court had directed the respondent No. 2, to consider the case of the petitioner on the basis of the recommendation made by the DLC and pass a reasoned order. Thereafter, vide order dated 16.07.2022, the respondent No. 2 had rejected the case of the petitioner by holding that his name finds no mention in the U-DISE up-to 2011 – 12, although his name appeared in the DISE Data, with a spelling mistake and his name was recorded as Azahar Ali instead of Ajahar Ali and therefore, he has approached this Court by filing the present petition seeking the aforementioned reliefs. 4. Mr. Hussain, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the name of the petitioner was continuously appearing in the DISE Data since 2009 – 10 till Page No.# 4/6 2022 – 23. But, the spelling of his name, since 2009 – 10 till 2013 – 14 appeared as Azahar Ali and since 2014 – 15 till 2022 – 23 appeared as Ajahar Ali and the actual spelling of his name would have been Ajahar Ali, which was corrected in the year 2014. Mr. Hussain further submits that while passing the impugned order dated 16.07.2022, the respondent No. 2 had rejected the prayer of the petitioner for provincialisation of his service on the ground that his name (Ajahar Ali) does not appear in the DISE Data for the year 2013 – 14. But, Mr. Hussain submits that he is the same person, whose name appeared as Azahar Ali since 2009 – 10 till 2013 – 14. Under such circumstances, Mr. Hussain has contended to allow this petition by setting aside and quashing the impugned speaking order. 5. It is to be noted here that vide order dated 14.05.2025, the District Elementary Education Officer (DEEO hereinafter), being respondent No. 3, was directed to make a verification as to whether Azahar Ali, whose name appeared in the DISE Data of the petitioner's school since the year 2009 – 10 till 2013 – 14 and Ajahar Ali, whose name appeared in the DISE Data since 2014 – 15 up to 2022 – 23, is the same person or not and accordingly, Mr. Sarma, learned standing counsel for the Elementary Education Department, has produced a letter of the DEE, dated 21.11.2025, wherein it is stated that Azahar Ali, whose name appeared in the DISE Data of the petitioner's school since the year 2009 – 10 till 2013 – 14 and Ajahar Ali, whose name appeared in the DISE Data since 2014 – 15 up to 2022 – 23, is the same person. 5.1. Mr. Sarma, on the basis of the aforementioned letter of the DEE and the report of the DEEO, Darrang, submits that now the respondent No. 2 may be directed to place the matter before the State Level Committee (SLC hereinafter) again. Page No.# 5/6 6. In reply, Mr. Hussain, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that in view of the report of the DEEO and letter of the DEE, this matter may be disposed of by directing the respondent No. 2 to place the case of the petitioner before the SLC for giving a fresh consideration within a fixed time. 7. Having heard the submissions of learned counsel for both the parties, I have carefully gone through the petition as well as the documents placed on record and also perused the impugned order dated 16.07.2022. 8. It appears that the prayer of the petitioner for provincialisation of his service was rejected primarily on the ground that his name, i.e. Ajahar Ali, does not appear in the DISE Data up-to the year 2013 – 14 and thereby, the same does not fulfill the DISE condition as laid down in the minutes of the Joint Committee held on 24.07.2020. 8.1. But, as per the letter produced before this Court today, which was issued by the DEE, DEEO and Block Elementary Education Officer (BEEO hereinafter), it appears that Azahar Ali, whose name appeared in the DISE Data of the petitioner's school since the year 2009 – 10 till 2013 – 14 and Ajahar Ali, whose name appeared in the DISE Data since 2014 – 15 up to 2022 – 23, is one and the same person. 9. In that view of the matter, the impugned order dated 16.07.2022, got no legs to stand upon and it fails to withstand the legal scrutiny and on such count, the same stands set aside and quashed. By a mandamus of this Court, the respondent No. 2 is directed to place the case of the present petitioner before the next available SLC meeting. On such matter being placed, the SLC shall consider the same in accordance with law. 10. The aforesaid exercise shall be carried out within a period of 2 (two) Page No.# 6/6 months from the date of receipt of the certified copy of this order. 11. The petitioner shall obtain a certified copy of this order and place the same before the respondent No. 2 within a period of 1 (one) week from today. 12. The letters, issued by the DEE dated 21.11.2025; DEEO 21.11.2025; and BEEO dated 06.11.2025, shall be marked as Annexure – X, Y & Z and tagged with the record. JUDGE Comparing Assistant