Page No.# 1/4 GAHC010251072025 2025:GAU-AS:17453 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : WP(C)/6573/2025 BILAL HUSSAIN SON OF ALTAF HUSSAIN, RESIDENT OF KHADIMAN, P.O. BADARPURGHAT, DIST. SRIBHUMI, ASSAM VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM AND 4 ORS REPRESENTED BY THE COMMISSIONER AND SECRETARY TO THE GOVERNMENT OF ASSAM, DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION, DISPUR, GUWAHATI-06. 2:THE DIRECTOR DIRECTORATE OF SECONDARY EDUCATION ASSAM KAHILIPARA GUWAHATI-19. 3:THE SECRETARY BOARD OF SECONDARY EDUCATION ASSAM (SEBA) BAMUNIMAIDAM GUWAHATI. 4:THE INSPECTOR OF SCHOOL SILCHAR CACHAR ASSAM 5:THE PRINCIPAL UNIVERSAL KNOWLEDGE PARK SCHOOL CHIRUA MADHURBAND Page No.# 2/4 SILCHAR ASSAM PIN- 788001 Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. J I BORBHUIYA, MRS. K H CHOUDHURY,A B T HAQUE,MR A HOSSAIN Advocate for the Respondent : SC, SEC. EDU., MR A MALEK (R-5),MR F A LASKAR (R-5) BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE NELSON SAILO ORDER Date : 17-12-2025 Heard Mr. JI Borbhuiya, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. U Sharma, learned Standing Counsel, Secondary Education Department as well as Mr. FA Laskar, learned counsel for the respondent No. 5. [2] The petitioner is before this Court with a grievance that the respondent No. 5 has failed to issue Transfer Certificate to the two children of the petitioner, who were studying in Class-L.K.G. and Class-III despite submitting application for the same. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that Transfer Certificate is required because the petitioner has shifted from Silchar to Badarpur and therefore, change of School will be required and without having a Transfer Certificate getting the admission for his children would be not possible. [3] The learned counsel for the respondent No. 5, on the other hand submits that the petitioner was asked to come to the School and submit the requisite documents and particulars, but the petitioner has failed to do so and that is why the Transfer Certificate could not be issued. [4] Mr. U Sharma, learned Standing Counsel, Secondary Education Department Page No.# 3/4 submits that in terms of the last Court’s order, he has received instructions, which is to the effect that the School has not applied for permission to open the School and therefore, the Inspector of School concerned does not have any role pertaining to the said School. [5] The learned counsel for the respondent No. 5 also submits that since the School is a private School writ would not lie and on this ground the writ petition should be dismissed. [6] Upon considering the submissions made by the learned counsels for the parties, this Court would not like to enter into the maintainability of the writ petition for the simple reason that the welfare of the two children would be effected if the litigation is dragged further. What would be required at this stage would be for the petitioner to fulfill the requisites to be deposited or submitted before the School authorities and the School authorities should accordingly act upon it and issue the Transfer Certificate to the children of the petitioner. [7] In view of above, the respondent No. 5 shall issue a letter to the petitioner clearly specifying what are the documents and particulars that would be necessary to be submitted to the School in order to provide the Transfer Certificate of the two children. The same should be furnished to the petitioner within 10 (ten) days from today. [8] Upon receipt of the said letter, the petitioner shall ensure submitting all the requisites, as mentioned in the said letter and upon receipt of the same, the School authorities would issue the Transfer Certificate without delay. The entire process should be completed within a period of 3 (three) weeks from today. The respondent No. 5 shall communicate to the petitioner in the address given in the Page No.# 4/4 cause-title of the writ petition. [9] With the above observations and directions, this writ petition stands disposed of. JUDGE Comparing Assistant