Page No.# 1/9 GAHC010172182016 2026:GAU-AS:12160 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : WP(C)/4182/2016 SMT. KABERI ROY CHOUDHURY D/O. SRI SUSHITAL ROY CHOUDHURY, R/O. UKILPATTY, KARIMGANJ, P.O. and P.S.. KARIMGANJ, DIST. KARIMGANJ, ASSAM. VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM and 5 ORS. REP. BY THE COMM. and SECY. TO THE GOVT. OF ASSAM, EDUCATION ELEMENTARY DEPTT., DISPUR, GHY.-781006. 2:THE COMMISSIONER and SECY. TO THE GOVT. OF ASSAM FINANCE DEPTT. DISPUR GHY.-781006. 3:THE DIRECTOR ELEMENTARY EDUCATION ASSAM KAHILIPARA GHY.-781019. 4:THE DY. COMMISSIONER KARIMGANJ DIST. KARIMGANJ ASSAM. 5:THE DIST. ELEMENTARY EDU. OFFICER KARIMGANJ Page No.# 2/9 DIST. KARIMGANJ ASSAM. 6:THE DY. INSPECTOR OF SCHOOLS KARIMGANJ DIST. KARIMGANJ ASSAM Advocate for the Petitioner : MRSM M ROY, MR.S K ROY Advocate for the Respondent : SC, ELEMENTARY EDUCATION, MR.S P BHATTACHARJEE,SC, FINANCE,GA, ASSAM BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE N. UNNI KRISHNAN NAIR ORDER Date : 25.08.2026 Heard Mr. S K Roy, Learned Counsel for the Petitioner. Also heard Mr. P N Sarma, Learned Standing Counsel, Dept. of Elementary Education, Assam. 2. The Petitioner, by way of instituting the present Writ Petition, has prayed for a direction upon the Respondent authorities to authorize to her, her current as well as arrear salaries. 3. As projected in the Writ Petition, the Petitioner, who is a differently- abled person, had submitted her candidature, in pursuance to an advertisement dated 28.12.1996, issued by the Director of Elementary Education, Assam, inviting applications for filling up of posts of Assistant Teachers available in various lower primary Schools of the State. It is projected that after the said selection process was Page No.# 3/9 concluded, the select list dated 27.10.1999, was published containing the names of the 112 (One Hundred Twelve) candidates. The name of the Petitioner appeared at Sl. No. 52 of the said list. Thereafter, a further select list dated 13.11.1999, was so issued containing names of 72 candidates. Thereafter, it is projected that a combined Select list was also published, containing the names of 184 candidates. The Petitioner further projects that she was selected against the quota mandated to be filled up by physically handicapped candidates. Accordingly, it is projected by the Petitioner basing on her selection, was, vide order dated 20.11.1999, issued by the Deputy Inspector of Schools, Karimganj, appointed as a Stipendiary Teacher in 482 Sheralipur L.P School. The Petitioner projects that she joined her said services in pursuance to the said order of appointment on 01.12.1999. 4. The matter pertaining to the publication of the 3 (Three) select lists, as well as the issue as which of the select list would be the genuine one, was required by a Division Bench of this Court in the proceedings of WA No. 09/2007 and WA No. 111/2007, to be examined by the Respondent authorities. Accordingly, the Commissioner & Secretary, Education (Elementary) Dept., vide the order dated 19.08.2009, on an examination of the matter, proceeded to hold that the select list containing the names of 111 (One Hundred Eleven) persons, published on 27.10.1999, to be the only available reliable document to base the processing of recruitments against the available posts. Accordingly, the Director of Elementary Education, Assam, was directed to appoint persons from the said select list dated Page No.# 4/9 27.10.1999. It is projected by the Petitioner that her name duly figured in the said select list dated 27.10.1999. Thereafter, it is projected that the Director of Elementary Education, Assam, proceeded to issue orders appointing persons from the select list in the year 2009 and accordingly, 102/103 persons came to be so appointed from the said select list. However, no order appointing the Petitioner from the said list came to be issued, although her name figured in the said select list. The salaries of the Petitioner not being released to her, although, she was continuing in her services, the Petitioner has instituted the present Writ Petition. 5. Mr. S K Roy, Learned Counsel for the Petitioner, after reiterating the facts noticed, hereinabove, has submitted that while the appointments were being effected from the select list in question, by the Director of Elementary Education, Assam, in the year 2009, no enquiry was made, with regard to the continuance of the Petitioner in service. Mr. S K Roy, Learned Counsel for the Petitioner submits that the name of the Petitioner duly figuring in the select list dated 27.10.1999, it was the bounded duty of Director of Elementary Education, Assam, to also issue orders appointing the Petitioner, inasmuch as the earlier appointments, in terms of the directions passed by the Division Bench of this Court, were rendered non-est and a fresh appointment process, in terms of the merit position of the candidates obtaining in the said select list was initiated. Mr. S K Roy, Learned Counsel for the Petitioner, submits that the Petitioner admittedly being included in the select list, by also reckoning her physical disability status, the Director of Elementary Education, Assam, Page No.# 5/9 ought not to have ignored the merit position obtained by the Petitioner in the select list. Mr. S K Roy, Learned Counsel for the Petitioner, by referring to the certificates brought on record, issued by the Head Teacher of the 482 No. Sheralipur LP School, submits that the same would go to reveal that the Petitioner, since the date of her initial appointment, effected, vide order dated 20.11.1999, had continued to render her services as a Stipendiary Teacher, therein. Mr. S K Roy, Learned Counsel for the Petitioner, reiterates that even as on date, the Petitioner is continuing to discharge her duties in the said School. However, the Petitioner has not been authorized her pay and allowances, since the date of her initial appointment. 6. Per contra, Mr. P N Sarma, Learned Standing Counsel, Dept. of Elementary Education, Assam, by referring to the affidavit filed in the matter by the Director of Elementary Education, Assam, has submitted that the name of the Petitioner, although figuring in the select list published of 111 candidates, when the process of effecting fresh appointments, therefrom, was so done in the year 2009, the Petitioner, herein, was not found to be working as a Teacher in the School, on the basis of her earlier order of appointment dated 20.11.1999 and accordingly, a fresh order towards appointing her, was not issued. He further submits that the exercise, as carried out for effecting appointment after the directions so passed by the Division Bench of this Court, was concluded in the year 2010 and the Petitioner had approached this Court after prolonged delay only in the year 2016 and accordingly, the Petitioner would not be entitled to the reliefs prayed for in the Page No.# 6/9 present Writ Petition. 7. I have heard the Learned Counsel for the Parties and also perused the materials available on record. 8. It is not disputed by the Respondents that the name of the Petitioner figured in the select list dated 27.10.1999. The Petitioner, admittedly, was appointed in pursuance, thereof, vide an order dated 20.11.1999. However, the said appointment effected, in respect of the Petitioner is found to be a tentative appointment, inasmuch as, the issue as to which of the 3 (Three) select lists published in the matter is to be reckoned, was pending before this Court. A Division Bench of this Court, in the proceedings of the WA No. 09/2007 and WA No. 111/2007, had remanded back the matter to the Government in the Education (Elementary Department), with a direction to examine the matter and to decide as to which of the 3 (Three) select lists is the genuine select list. 9. Accordingly, vide order dated 19.08.2009, the Commissioner & Secretary, Govt. of Assam, Education (Elementary Department), on verifying the 3 (Three) select lists had come to a conclusion that the select list of 111 (One Hundred Eleven) persons, as prepared in the meeting of the Selection Committee held on 27.10.1999, was the only available reliable document for processing with the recruitment process. Accordingly, the Director of Elementary Education, Assam, was directed to appoint persons whose names figured in the said select list of 111 (One Hundred Eleven) persons. Page No.# 7/9 10. A perusal of the order dated 19.08.2009, would go to reveal that the earlier recruitment made, were held to be non-est and accordingly, the Director was required to effect fresh appointments from the select list, in terms of the order dated 19.08.2009. The Director of Elementary Education, Assam, accordingly, proceeded to issue orders appointing persons in batches from the select list. Such orders were so issued during the year 2009-10. However, the Petitioner, whose name duly figured in the said select list, prepared in the meeting of the Selection Committee held on 27.10.1999, was not considered for such appointment and her name was excluded from the process. 11. The Respondents have sought to justify the exclusion of the Petitioner from the purview of the appointment, effected in the matter, on the ground that the Petitioner, after her initial appointment effected, vide the order dated 20.11.1999, was not found to be serving in the School in question, when the process for issuance of fresh appointment orders was being carried out, in pursuance to the order dated 19.08.2009, passed by the Secretary to the Govt. of Assam, Education (Elementary Department). 12. This Court has perused the said contentions raised by the Respondent in the said affidavit. This Court finds that the said contention to be clearly perverse, inasmuch as, after the passing of the order dated 19.08.2009, the Director of Elementary Education, Assam, was required to effect appointments from the select list in question and there was no stipulation made therein, that such Page No.# 8/9 appointments would be made in respect of the persons, who were continuing in their respective services, in pursuance to the appointment orders issued in their cases in the year 1999. Accordingly, the ground assigned in for denial to the Petitioner of her due appointment in terms of a merit position in the select list in question, is found by this Court, to be not acceptable. 13. The Petitioner, in the present Writ Petition, has brought on record materials to demonstrate that w.e.f 20.11.1999, the Petitioner is continuing in her services and the Learned Counsel for the Petitioner has reiterated that the Petitioner, even as on date, is continuing in her services. 14. In view of the above conclusions reached by this Court, the Director of Elementary Education, Assam, is directed to verify, as to whether the Petitioner is continuing to discharge her duties in the School in question, to which she was appointed, vide the order dated 20.11.1999. 15. In the event, the Petitioner is found to have been continuing in her services, w.e.f 20.11.1999, till today, the Director of Elementary Education, Assam, would construe that the Petitioner was also so appointed in the year 2009 and accordingly, proceed to compute the salaries receivable by the Petitioner, w.e.f 22.12.2009 and release the same to the Petitioner within the period of 4 (four) months from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order. The Petitioner would not be entitled to receive any salaries for the period w.e.f 20.11.1999 to 22.12.2009. The other service conditions of the Petitioner shall be similar to the one Page No.# 9/9 as applied, in respect of the other persons, whose name figured in the select list prepared in the meeting of the Selection Committee, in its meeting held on 27.10.1999 and who were appointed in their respective service, in pursuance to the directions passed by the Commissioner & Secretary, Education (Elementary) Department, vide order dated 19.08.2009. 16. The Petitioner is directed to submit a representation along with a certified copy of this order before the Director of Elementary Education, Assam, for facilitating the latter to comply with the directions passed, hereinabove. 17. With the above observations and directions, the present Writ Petition stands disposed of. JUDGE Comparing Assistant