Page No.# 1/3 GAHC010040052025 undefined THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : WP(C)/1138/2025 SEEMA NATH WO BIKRAMJIT NATH , VILL.- SHIBALIK PARK LANE NO 1, UTTAR KRISHNAPUR PART I, P.O MEHERPUR, PS SILCHAR, DIST CACHAR ASSAM VERSUS THE UNION OF INDIA REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY TO THE GOVT OF INDIA, MINISTRY OF EDUCATION, SHASTRI BHAWAN, DR RAJENDRA ROAD, NEW DELHI-01 2:THE NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF OPEN SCHOOLING (AN AUTONOMOUS INSTITUTION UNDER THE MINISTRY OF EDUCATION GOVT. OF INDIA) REPRESENTED BY ITS DIRECTOR INSTITUTIONAL AREA SECTOR-62 NOIDA UTTAR PRADESH PIN- 201309. 3:THE REGIONAL DIRECTOR THE NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF OPEN SCHOOLING (NIOS) ASSAM BAMUNIMAIDAM GHY-21. 4:THE COORDINATOR NIOS CUM PRINCIPAL NEHRU H.S SCHOOL VILLAGE AND P.O- PAILAPOOL DIST- CACHAR ASSAM PIN-78809 Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. A H M R CHOUDHURY, BARASHA BORAH BORDOLOI Advocate for the Respondent : DY.S.G.I., Page No.# 2/3 BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MICHAEL ZOTHANKHUMA ORDER Date : 03.03.2025 Heard Mr. A. H. M. R. Choudhury, learned counsel for the petitioner, who submits that the petitioner’s service as a Tutor was provincialized under the Assam Education (Provincialization of Services of Teacher and Re-organization of Educational Institutions) Act, 2017, while working in 646 Khadimpara L.P. School, Hailakandi. The petitioner had enrolled in the National Institute of Open Schooling (in short, NIOS), at it’s study centre Nehru H. S. School, Pailapool, Cachar, wherein his enrolment number was No. 18210216303002. The petitioner had appeared in the examination in all the subjects, including “School Based Activities” and the results were declared by the NIOS in the month of March, 2019. The petitioner found that though she had passed in all the other subjects, she was shown as “AB”, i.e. “absent” against the subject 512 Workshop Based Activities. 2. The petitioner’s counsel submits that the respondent No. 4 has written a letter dated 06.06.2019 to the Regional Director, NIOS, Guwahati Regional Circle, stating that the petitioner had secured 80 marks in the subject 512 Workshop Based Activities. He also submits that as per the statement of marks issued by the NIOS in respect with the study centre code 471821031, Nehru H.S. School, Pailapool, the petitioner had secured 80 marks in Workshop Based Activities. However, the respondents have not made any correction to the petitioner’s mark sheet till date. Page No.# 3/3 3. Mr. A. R. Tahbildar, learned counsel appears on behalf of Mr. K. Gogoi, learned counsel for the respondent No. 1. 4. On perusing the writ petition, it is seen that no representation has been annexed by the petitioner to the respondents. As such, the same gives rise to an inference that the petitioner has not submitted any representation to the authorities, though the petitioner has stated that representations had been sent to the respondent No. 2 by registered post. 5. On considering the fact that there is no proof of submission of representation by the petitioner, this Court is of the view that the petitioner would have to first approach the concerned authority, by submitting a proper representation with regard to her grievance. Accordingly, this Court gives liberty to the petitioner to submit a representation with regard to her grievance, with the respondent No. 3. The respondent No. 3 shall thereafter take a decision on the petitioner’s representation within one month and communicate the decision to the petitioner. 6. The writ petition is accordingly disposed of. JUDGE Comparing Assistant