Page No.# 1/8 GAHC010039312023 2025:GAU-AS:2995 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : WP(C)/1017/2023 NILA KANTA CHUTIA S/O- KULESWAR CHUTIA, VILL- BHEBELI GAON, P.O. SISSIBORGAON, P.S. SILAPATHAR, DIST.- DHEMAJI (ASSAM), PIN- 787110 VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM AND 4 ORS REP. BY THE SECY. TO THE GOVT. OF ASSAM, SCHOOL EDUCATION (ELEMENTARY) DEPTT., DISPUR, GHY-6 2:THE DIRECTOR OF ELEMENTARY EDUCATION ASSAM KAHILIPARA GHY-19 3:THE DISTRICT LEVEL SCRUTINY COMMITTEE DHEMAJI REP. BY ITS CHAIRMAN-CUM-DY. COMMISSIONER DHEMAJI DISTRICT DHEMAJI P.O. AND DIST.- DHEMAJI ASSAM PIN- 787057 4:THE DISTRICT ELEMENTARY EDUCATION OFFICER DHEMAJI P.O. AND DIST.- DHEMAJI ASSAM PIN- 787057 5:THE BLOCK ELEMENTARY EDUCATION OFFICER DHEMAJI P.O. AND P.S. DHEMAJI Page No.# 2/8 DIST.- DHEMAJI (ASSAM) PIN- 78705 Advocates for the Petitioners: Mr. D. Bhuyan, Advocate. Advocates for the respondents: Mr. P.N. Sarma, SC, Elementary Education. Mr. P. Saikia, Govt. Advocate for res-3 B E F O R E HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE KARDAK ETE Date of hearing : 19.03.2025 Date of Judgment: 19.03.2025 JUDGMENT & ORDER (Oral) Heard Mr. D. Bhuyan, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. P.N. Sarma, learned Standing Counsel, Elementary Education for the respondent nos.1, 2, 4 and 5 and Mr. P. Saikia, learned State Counsel for the respondent no.3. 2. By filing this writ petition, the petitioner has prayed for a direction to the respondent authorities to place the case of the petitioner before the District Scrutiny Committee (DSC), Dhemaji, in terms of the Section 13(6) of the Assam Education (Provincialization of Services of Teachers and Re-Organisation of Educational Institutions) Act, 2017 for consideration for provincialization of service as Assistant Teacher in Bhebeli Adarsha M.E. School, Dhemaji. 3. In view of the limited prayer made by the learned counsel for the petitioner for placing the case of the petitioner before the District Scrutiny Committee (DSC), Dhemaji, the writ petition is heard and disposed of by this order. 4. The case of the petitioner, shorn of unnecessary details, is that this Court Page No.# 3/8 vide order dated 21.03.2018 passed in WP(C) 898/2014 filed by the petitioner seeking provincialization of his service as Assistant Teacher under the Assam Venture Educational Institution (Provincialization) Service Act, 2011 and also challenging the appointment of one Pabitra Chutia, while dismissing the writ petition being not maintainable, has observed, on consideration that the State has enacted the new Act, namely, Assam Education (Provincialization of Services of Teachers and Re-Organisation of Educational Institutions) Act, 2017, in the meantime, that the respondent authorities may consider the case of the provincialization of the petitioner under Section 13(6) of the Assam Education (Provincialization of Services of Teachers and Re-Organisation of Educational Institutions) Act, 2017, if otherwise, the petitioner is eligible. 5. Pursuant thereto, vide order dated 09.08.2022 issued by the Director of Elementary Education, Govt. of Assam, has rejected the case of the petitioner, whereby the claim of the petitioner has been rejected, as the name of the petitioner was not recommended by the District Scrutiny Committee (DSC), Dhemaji, and the petitioner not being a Science Teacher and all other subject teachers have been appointed, in terms of Section 3(1)(xi) of the Assam Education (Provincialization of Services of Teachers and Re-Organisation of Educational Institutions) Act, 2017. 6. Mr. D. Bhuyan, learned counsel for the petitioner vehemently urged that since the direction of this Court dated 21.03.2018 is for consideration of the case of the petitioner under Section 13(6) of the Assam Education (Provincialization of Services of Teachers and Re-Organisation of Educational Institutions) Act, 2017, the same ought to have placed before the District Scrutiny Committee (DSC), Dhemaji. Therefore, a direction may be issued to the respondent authority to placed the case of the petitioner before the District Page No.# 4/8 Scrutiny Committee (DSC), Dhemaji. 7. Mr. P. Saikia, learned State Counsel submits that already there is a direction by this Court vide order dated 21.03.2018 passed in WP(C) 898/2014. Therefore, there cannot be any direction over the said direction passed by this Court. More so, the order is only for consideration without there being any issuance of mandamus. He further submits that since the case of the petitioner, although, by the Director, has fairly been considered with a reasoned order, a direction for placing the matter again before the District Scrutiny Committee (DSC), Dhemaji, would be unnecessary as the legality and otherwise of the impugned order passed by the Competent Authority being the Director of Elementary Education, has not been put to challenge. 8. I have considered the submissions of the learned counsel for the parties and perused the materials on record. 9. The petitioner has challenged the order dated 20.12.2013 by filing a writ petition being WP(C) 898/2014, whereby, the list of employees, who have been provincialised under the Assam Venture Educational Institution (Provincialization) Service Act, 2011, particularly name of one Pabitra Chutia, who was shown as the Headmaster of the Bhebeli Adarsha M.E. School, Dhemaji, and the name of the petitioner was excluded from the said list of provincialization. The petitioner had prayed for inclusion of his name in the list of teachers for provincialization. 10. After consideration of the matter, vide order dated 21.03.2018, this Court has held that the challenge to the promotion of one Pabitra Chutia as Headmaster of the Bhebeli Adarsha M.E. School, Dhemaji in the year 1995 cannot be invalidated in the writ petition, which has been filed in the year, 2014. Page No.# 5/8 Accordingly, the writ petition was held to be not maintainable. However, it has been observed that since the new Act, namely, Assam Education (Provincialization of Services of Teachers and Re-Organisation of Educational Institutions) Act, 2017, the respondents may consider the case of provincialization of the petitioner under Section 13(6) of the Assam Education (Provincialization of Services of Teachers and Re-Organisation of Educational Institutions) Act, 2017, if otherwise, the petitioner is eligible. 11. Pursuant thereto, the case of the petitioner appears to have been considered vide order dated 09.08.2022 by the Director of Elementary Education, Govt. of Assam. By the above order, a detail consideration appears to have been made by the Director of Elementary Education, Govt. of Assam, thereafter, the claim of the petitioner for provincialization of service against Bhebeli Adarsha M.E. School, Dhemaji, has been rejected, on the ground that the petitioner cannot be considered, as per the Section 3(1)(xi) of the Assam Education (Provincialization of Services of Teachers and Re-Organisation of Educational Institutions) Act, 2017. 12. The learned counsel for the petitioner, without arguing the challenge to the validity or otherwise of the order dated 09.08.2022 passed by the Director of Elementary Education, Govt. of Assam, has strenuously urged that since the respondent authorities has not placed the case of the petitioner before the District Scrutiny Committee (DSC), Dhemaji, in terms of Section 13(6) of the Assam Education (Provincialization of Services of Teachers and Re-Organisation of Educational Institutions) Act, 2017, the respondent authorities be directed to place the same before the said District Scrutiny Committee (DSC), Dhemaji, by heavily emphasising on the order dated 21.03.2018. 13. As noted above, this Court in the writ petition being WP(C) 898/2014 has Page No.# 6/8 observed that in view of the enactment of new Act of Assam Education (Provincialization of Services of Teachers and Re-Organisation of Educational Institutions) Act, 2017, respondent authority may consider the case of the petitioner under Section 13(6) of the said Act, 2017, I am of the view that the respondent authority, particularly, the Director of Elementary Education, Govt. of Assam, appears to have considered the case of the petitioner in its proper prospective with a speaking order. 14. It is true that as per Section 13(6) of the Assam Education (Provincialization of Services of Teachers and Re-Organisation of Educational Institutions) Act, 2017, for consideration for provincialization of the school and the services of the employees are to be placed before the District Scrutiny Committee (DSC). However, since the consideration appears to have been made in its proper prospective, merely not placing the case of the petitioner before the District Scrutiny Committee (DSC), Dhemaji, would not make any difference, as the petitioner has not particularly challenge the said consideration by the said order dated 21.03.2018, where, the case of the petitioner has been considered and rejected with reasons. Thus, I am of the view that placing before District Scrutiny Committee (DSC), Dhemaji, would be mere formality. More so, the specific and the strenuous submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner is limited for placing the case of the petitioner before the District Scrutiny Committee (DSC), Dhemaji, without arguing on the validity or otherwise of the said order dated 21.03.2018 and on its merit. 15. In this context, reference may be made to the provision of Section 13(6) of the Assam Education (Provincialization of Services of Teachers and Re- Organisation of Educational Institutions) Act, 2017, which is reproduced as under. Page No.# 7/8 “13. District Scrutiny Committee and State Level Scrutiny Committee: (1) There shall be District Scrutiny Committees in each district separately for Elementary, Secondary and for Higher Education to scrutinize service records and other related issues of the serving teachers of Venture Educational Institutions pertaining to provincialisation of their services. (6) The District Scrutiny Committee shall first scrutinize and prepare a list of all Venture Educational Institutions within the district, which are eligible in terms of the provisions of this Act and shall thereafter proceed to scrutinize and verify the service records of all the serving teachers, who are eligible or would become eligible for being considered for provincialisation of their services. The District Committee shall identify a Base School for each category of school and recommend the name or teacher/tutor to be associated against each Base School.” 16. The categorical stand of the respondent authorities with regard to the qualification or the eligibility of the petitioner to be considered for provincialization of his service is that the petitioner is not a Science Teacher is not disputed by the petitioner. As per Section 3(1)(xi)of the Assam Education (Provincialization of Services of Teachers and Re-Organisation of Educational Institutions) Act, 2017, provides that subject to the provisions of Article 30 of the Constitution of India, the following categories of Venture Educational Institutions shall be eligible for being considered for provincialisation of the services of their teachers and tutors. In case of Venture Upper Primary School there shall be minimum three teachers or tutors at least one teacher each for (a) Science and Mathematics (b) Social Studies and (c) Languages: Provided that for additional posts it shall be considered in accordance with the norms and standard stipulated in the Schedule under Sections 19 and 25 of the Right of Children to Free and Compulsory Education Act, 2009. 17. Thus, since non-eligibility of the petitioner as per the provision of Assam Education (Provincialization of Services of Teachers and Re-Organisation of Page No.# 8/8 Educational Institutions) Act, 2017, for provincialization of the service of the petitioner is undisputed, the placing of case of the petitioner before the District Committee (DSC), Dhemaji, would be a futile exercise. That apart, it would not be appropriate to pass a direction as sought by the learned counsel for the petitioner to consider the case of the petitioner by placing the same before the District Committee (DSC), Dhemaji, over an again on the order dated 21.03.2018 passed by this Court, pursuant to which, in essence has already been considered by the appropriate authority. 18. For the foregoing reasons, this Court is of the view that the strenuous submission for placing the case of the petitioner for provincialization of the service of petitioner before the District Committee (DSC), Dhemaji, is negated. 19. Accordingly, the writ petition stands dismissed being devoid of merit and disposed of. No order as to cost. JUDGE Comparing Assistant