Page No.# 1/6 GAHC010049892022 undefined THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : WP(C)/2090/2022 GANESH SARMA AND 6 ORS. S/O- LATE JOYDEV SARMA, R/O- VILL.- BONGALIKUCHI, P.O. AND P.S. RANGIA, DIST.- KAMRUP, ASSAM 2: DILOWARA BEGUM W/O- SYED RAFIUL HAQUE R/O- VILL.- PUB-SAHAN P.O. AND P.S. RANGIA DIST.- KAMRUP ASSAM 3: MINUWARA BEGUM W/O- LATE AZIZUR RAHMAN R/O- VILL.- MURARA (KAJIGAON) P.O. AND P.S. RANGIA DIST.- KAMRUP ASSAM 4: GANESH CHANDRA KAKATI S/O- BHABIN CHANDRA KAKATI R/O- VILL.- DWIGINPAR (LEZA) P.O. BARUAJANI P.S. KAMALPUR DIST.- KAMRUP ASSAM 5: NURUL ISLAM S/O- LATE ACHAD ALI R/O- VILL.- ATHARA P.O. PUTHIMARI P.S. RANGIA DIST.- KAMRUP ASSAM Page No.# 2/6 6: GAGAN DEKA S/O- LATE BALO RAM DEKA R/O- VILL.- SAJEI P.O. DAGAON P.S. BAIHATA CHARIALI DIST.- KAMRUP ASSAM 7: AJMIRA BEGUM W/O- SYED TASHADLUK USHUB R/O- VILL.- KACHARUA P.O. PUTHIMARI P.S. KAMALPUR DIST.- KAMRUP ASSA VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM AND 3 ORS TO BE REPRESENTED BY THE COMMISSIONER AND SECRETARY TO THE GOVERNMENT OF ASSAM, SECONDARY EDUCATION DEPARTMENT, DISPUR, GUWAHATI-781006. 2:THE DIRECTOR OF SECONDARY EDUCATION ASSAM KAHILIPARA GUWAHATI-781019. 3:THE INSPECTOR OF SCHOOLS KAMRUP DISTRICT CIRCLE (RURAL) DADARA KAMRUP ASSAM 4:THE ACCOUNTANT GENERAL ASSAM BELTOLA GUWAHATI-781029 Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. M K SARMA, MS. S S SAIKIA,B KRISHNA Advocate for the Respondent : SC, SEC. EDU., SC, AG Page No.# 3/6 BEFORE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE NELSON SAILO 19.06.2025 Heard Mr. M.K. Sarma, learned counsel for the petitioners. Also heard Mr. U. Sarma, learned Standing Counsel, Secondary Education Department, for respondent Nos.1, 2 and 3 and Mr. R. Bodo, learned Standing Counsel, Accountant General, for respondent No.4. (2) Having regard to the nature of the grievance projected by the petitioners, this writ petition is taken up for disposal at this stage. (3) It is the case of the petitioners that they were initially working as Graduate Teachers in the respective schools until the said schools got amalgamated to the High School/Higher Secondary School concerned. The school where the petitioner Nos.1 and 2 were working got amalgamated with Siddhinath Vidyamandir High School, Nakul, Rangia in Kamrup (Rural) district w.e.f. 01.01.2018 vide Notification issued under Memo No.ASE 338/2017/pt- II/154 dated 01.01.2018. The school where the petitioner Nos.3, 5, 6 and 7 were working got amalgamated with Jawaharlal Nehru Higher Secondary School, Puthimari, Rangia in Kamrup (Rural) district w.e.f. 16.06.2017 vide Notification issued under Memo No.ASE 338/2017/469 dated 16.06.2017. Likewise the school where the petitioner No.4 was working got amalgamated with Pubpar Gandhiji H.E. Vidyapeeth High School, Kamalpur in Kamrup (Rural) district w.e.f. 22.09.2016 vide Notification issued under Memo No.ASE 481/2016/17 dated 22.09.2016. (4) It so happened that the Government of Assam in the Finance (Pay Research Unit) Department vide Notification dated 04.08.2018 (Annexure-B to Page No.# 4/6 the writ petition) upon careful consideration of the report submitted by the Pay Anomaly Committee constituted by the Government of Assam, decided to allow special allowance of Rs.300/- per month to the Graduate Teachers of High Schools/Higher Secondary Schools against the Grade Pay of Rs.8700/- with immediate effect. It is the case of the petitioners that the schools where they earlier worked got amalgamated either with the High School or Higher Secondary School before issuance of the Notification dated 04.08.2018 and they being the Graduate Teachers enjoying the Grade Pay of Rs.8700/-, are also entitled to get the special allowance of Rs.300/- per month. In this regard, the petitioners submitted a representation to the Inspector of Schools, Kamrup District Circle (Rural) and the said authority in turn forwarded the said representation to the Director of Secondary Education, Assam on 01.09.2020. However, since the representation submitted by the petitioners has not been considered or disposed of, the petitioners are before this Court. (5) Mr. U. Sarma, learned Standing Counsel, Secondary Education Department by referring to the affidavit-in-opposition filed by the Secondary Education Department submits that the petitioners initially worked in the M.E. schools and later on, they worked in the High School by virtue of amalgamation. The special allowance is only meant for the Graduate Teachers working in the High School or Higher Secondary School. Merely because the schools have been amalgamated with the High School or Higher Secondary School, petitioners cannot have a claim for the special allowance. He further submits that the special allowance is given only to the Graduate Teachers appointed against the sanctioned post of High School or Higher Secondary School unlike the petitioners who were appointed against the sanctioned post of M.E. School. (6) From the rival contentions made by the learned counsel appearing for the Page No.# 5/6 parties, it is noticed that amalgamation of the schools concerned happened in the year 2016, 2017 and 2018, respectively and prior to the notification dated 04.08.2018 issued by the Finance Department accepting the report submitted by the Pay Anomaly Committee which was constituted by the State Government. Admittedly the petitioners would have been appointed against the sanctioned post meant for M.E. school while they were working in the concerned M.E. school. But the State Government has taken a policy decision to amalgamate the M.E. schools with that of High Schools or Higher Secondary Schools. After such amalgamation, the decision to give special allowance to the Graduate Teachers in High Schools/Higher Secondary Schools was notified. If the stand of the Secondary Education Department is to be accepted then it would mean that despite the amalgamation of the schools concerned, two categories of Graduate Teachers are created by tracing back their respective origin so as to deny the special allowance to the Graduate Teachers, who were working in the M.E. School before amalgamation. Such step prima facie only appears to be in violation of the Fundamental Rights of the petitioners. Instead of taking a decision at this stage, this Court is of the considered view that it would be better for the respondent authorities to have a re-look into the matter in the background of the observations made hereinabove. (7) The writ petition is, therefore, disposed of directing the petitioners to file a concise representation before the Commissioner & Secretary to the Government of Assam, Secondary Education Department, respondent No.1 within a period of 15 (fifteen) days from today. Upon filing of such representation, the respondent No.1 shall give due consideration to the same and if necessary, by consulting with all other nodal departments that are required to be consulted and shall take a concise and precise decision by way of a speaking order as expeditiously Page No.# 6/6 as possible and not later than the outer limit of 3 (three) months from the date of receipt of such representation. It is also observed herein that if the petitioners are still aggrieved by the order to be passed, it would be open for them to approach this Court again. JUDGE Comparing Assistant