Page No.# 1/11 GAHC010047992024 2026:GAU-AS:12745 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : WP(C)/1697/2024 KANAK CHANDRA BORA S/O- LATE KUHURAM BORA, R/O- VILL.- JAKAUAPARA, P.O. HAZARIKAPARA, P.S. SIPAJHAR, DIST. DARRANG, ASSAM, PIN- 784145. VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM AND 4 ORS REPRESENTED BY THE COMMISSIONER AND SECRETARY TO THE GOVT. OF ASSAM, EDUCATION (ELEMENTARY) DEPARTMENT, DISPUR, GUWAHATI-781006. 2:THE DIRECTOR OF ELEMENTARY EDUCATION ASSAM KAHILIPARA GUWAHATI-781019. 3:THE DISTRICT ELEMENTARY EDUCATION OFFICER DARRANG MANGALDAI DARRANG ASSAM-784125. 4:THE BLOCK ELEMENTARY EDUCATION OFFICER SIPAJHAR BLOCK SIPAJHAR DARRANG ASSAM-784125. 5:THE INSPECTOR OF SCHOOLS MANGALDAI Page No.# 2/11 DARRANG ASSAM-784125 Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. A GANGULY, MR T CHHETRI Advocate for the Respondent : SC, ELEM. EDU, BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE N. UNNI KRISHNAN NAIR ORDER Date : 02.09.2026 Heard Mr. T. Chetri, learned counsel, appearing for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. B. Talukdar, learned Standing Counsel, Elementary Education Department, appearing for the Respondents. 2. The petitioner in the present writ petition has assailed a Speaking Order dated 09.05.2023, by which his promotion to the cadre of Assistant Teacher from the cadre of a Grade-IV employee (chowkidar) was cancelled. The petitioner has also assailed an order dated 20.05.2023, by which the provisional pension of the petitioner was directed to be authorized to him by only reckoning the period of service rendered by him w.e.f. 01.02.1989 to 31.01.2001 i.e., the period of service rendered by the petitioner as a Grade- IV employee. 3. As projected in the writ petition, the petitioner was initially appointed as a Grade-IV employee in Gandhi Smriti High Secondary School, Page No.# 3/11 vide order dated 20.07.1989. The petitioner was thereafter, transferred in the same capacity to Nehru Smrity Balika Vidyalaya, vide an order dated 15.02.1999. The Deputy Inspector of Schools, Mangaldai, vide an order dated 26.12.2000, proceeded to promote the petitioner, herein, to the cadre of Assistant Teacher in a L.P. School, and posted him in such capacity to Binowa L.P. School. The petitioner was thereafter, transferred from Binowa L.P. School to Soto Athiabari L.P. School. The petitioner on his such promotion was subsequently allowed to draw his pay and allowances in the pay scale attached to that of the Assistant Teacher of L.P. School. The petitioner w.e.f. 31.12.2020, on attaining the age of superannuation, retired from his services. The Respondent Authorities while processing the case of the petitioner for release of his pension and pensionary benefits, had noticed that the Deputy Inspector of Schools, Mangaldai, without jurisdiction had promoted the petitioner to the cadre of Assistant Teacher in a L.P. School. The said position having come on record and the promotion being held to be void ab initio, the pension and pensionary benefits of the petitioner was not processed further. Being aggrieved the petitioner had approached this Court by way of instituting a writ petition being WP(C).No.1746/2022. A Co-ordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 11.03.2022, noticing the issues arising in the said writ petition, disposed of the same by directing the Director of Elementary Education, Assam, to cause an enquiry Page No.# 4/11 against the petitioner and to bring the same to its logical conclusion within a period of 06 (six) months from the date of receipt of a certified copy of the said order and to take a firm stand as to whether the petitioner would be entitled to receive pension as a Grade-IV employee or as an Assistant Teacher or not at all. The petitioner was also directed to be authorized a provisional pension, pending finalization of his pension and pensionary benefits. In accordance with the directions passed by this Court, vide the order dated 11.03.2022, the Director of Elementary Education, Assam, proceeded vide order dated 09.05.2023, to consider the case of the petitioner and it was held that the promotion of the petitioner as an Assistant Teacher was void ab initio and accordingly, cancelled. In terms of the conclusions reached by the Director of Elementary Education, Assam, vide order dated 09.05.2023, the jurisdictional Inspector of Schools, proceeded to authorize to the petitioner a provisional pension and his service as a Grade-IV employee w.e.f., 01.02.1989 to 31.01.2001, was only reckoned for the purpose. The services rendered by the petitioner after being so permitted to the cadre of Assistant Teacher vide the order dated 26.12.2000, was however ignored. Being aggrieved, the petitioner has instituted the present writ petition. Page No.# 5/11 4. Mr. T. Chetri, learned counsel for the petitioner, by reiterating the facts, noticed, hereinabove, has submitted that the petitioner being promoted as an Assistant Teacher, he had continued to render his services in the promotional post as an Assistant Teacher. The services rendered by the petitioner in the promotional post, during the service tenure of the petitioner, was not hindered by the Respondent Authorities. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner had accordingly, retired from his services as an Assistant Teacher. The learned counsel for the petitioner further submits that during his service tenure, his promotion as an Assistant Teacher not being questioned, after the petitioner had superannuated from his services w.e.f. 31.12.2020, it was not permissible to question the same. Accordingly, it is submitted that the cancellation of the promotion of the petitioner, would mandate an interference from this Court. The learned counsel for the petitioner has accordingly, submitted that a direction be also issued to the respondents to authorize to the petitioner his pension and pensionary benefits in the scale of pay authorized to an Assistant Teacher, w.e.f. 01.01.2021. 4.1. Mr. T. Chetri, further submits that in the event, it is not permissible to construe that the petitioner had rendered services as an Assistant Teacher w.e.f. 01.02.2001, till the date of his superannuation, the petitioner admittedly having served the respondents in the school concerned, the Page No.# 6/11 respondents ought to have construed the said period of services rendered by the petitioner to have been so rendered as a Grade-IV employee. He submits that the petitioner having being permitted to continue in his services as an Assistant Teacher till the date of his superannuation and the petitioner having worked in such capacity, the Respondent Authorities should further be barred from effecting any recovery of the salaries drawn by the petitioner for the said period. 5. Mr. B. Talukdar, learned counsel, appearing for the respondents, submits that the promotion effected in respect of the petitioner, herein, from Grade-IV to the post of Assistant Teacher, was so effected without any jurisdiction by the Deputy Inspector of Schools, Darrang. Mr. Talukdar, submits that there exist no provisions in the Rules holding the field at the relevant point of time, providing for promotion to the cadre of Assistant Teacher from Grade-IV cadre of the service. Mr. Talukdar, accordingly submits that the services rendered by the petitioner on his such promotion as Assistant Teacher would not be mandated to be reckoned for the purpose of computing his pension and pensionary benefits and the petitioner would be entitled to receive his pension and pensionary benefits as a Grade-IV employee and that too for the period of services rendered by him prior to 01.02.2001. 5.1. Mr. Talukdar, submits that in pursuance to the directions passed Page No.# 7/11 by this Court in the earlier round of litigation, the Director of Elementary Education, Assam, had issued the impugned Speaking Order dated 09.05.2023, interfering with the promotion effected in respect of the petitioner to the cadre of Assistant Teacher, after considering all relevant factors and accordingly, he submits that the said order dated 09.05.2023, would not mandate an interference from this Court. 6. I have heard the learned counsel for the parties and also perused the materials available on record. 7. The petitioner, herein, admittedly was appointed as a Grade-IV employee vide an order dated 20.07.1989. The petitioner thereafter, continued in his services in such capacity. The Deputy Inspector of Schools, Mangaldai, vide an order dated 26.12.2000, proceeded to promote the petitioner to the post of Assistant Teacher and posted him in such capacity to Binowa L.P. School. The petitioner was thereafter, vide an order dated 27.02.2001, transferred as an Assistant Teacher from Binowa L.P. School to Soto Athiabari L.P. School. The petitioner continued to discharge his duties as an Assistant Teacher and on reaching the age of superannuation, retired from his services w.e.f. 31.12.2020, as an Assistant Teacher. 8. As noticed, hereinabove, while processing the case of the petitioner for authorizing to him pension and pensionary benefits, it had come to the notice of the Respondent Authorities, that the promotion of the petitioner to Page No.# 8/11 the cadre of Assistant Teacher effected without jurisdiction by the Deputy Inspector of Schools, Darrang, vide order dated 26.12.2000. The respondents have further projected that under the Rules holding the field, promotion to the cadre of Assistant Teacher from the cadre of Grade-IV employee is not contemplated and/or provided for. Accordingly, in pursuance to the directions passed by this Court, vide order dated 11.03.2022, in WP(C).No.1746/2022, the Director of Elementary Education Department, Assam, vide a Speaking Order dated 09.05.2023, proceeded to cancel the promotion of the petitioner to the post of Assistant Teacher effected vide the order dated 26.12.2000, by holding it to be null and void. However, what is to be noted is that such cancellation of the promotion of the petitioner had occasioned only after he had superannuated from his services, which had so occasioned w.e.f. 31.12.2020. The promotion of the petitioner having been interfered with by the Director of Elementary Education, vide the said order dated 09.05.2023, the jurisdictional Inspector of Schools, while authorizing to the petitioner a provisional pension, had reckoned the qualifying service of the petitioner for purpose of such pension w.e.f. 01.02.1989 to 31.01.2001 i.e. the period of service rendered by the petitioner as an Grade- IV employee prior to his promotion as an Assistant Teacher. 9. Admittedly, the promotion of the petitioner as an Assistant Teacher is clearly in violation of the Rules holding the field at the relevant point of Page No.# 9/11 time. It is also settled by decisions of this Court that such promotion from the Grade-IV cadre to the cadre of Assistant Teacher is not permissible. Accordingly, the interference made with the promotion of the petitioner to the cadre of Assistant Teacher by the Director of Elementary Education vide order dated 09.05.2023, in the considered view of this Court is not erroneous. 10. However, having drawn the said conclusion, this Court finds that the petitioner after his initial appointment dated 20.07.1989 i.e., the date of his initial appointment on honorary basis, was in continuous service till the date of his superannuation occasioning on 31.12.2020. As noticed, hereinabove, after being promoted to the cadre of Assistant Teacher, the petitioner had continued in such capacity till the date of his superannuation i.e., on 31.12.2020. Accordingly, the said period of service rendered by the petitioner cannot be obliterated and in the event, it is not permissible to reckon his promotion as an Assistant Teacher, such services must be construed to have been rendered by the petitioner as a Grade-IV employee. Accordingly, the Respondent Authorities would now construe the petitioner to have continued as a Grade-IV employee since the date of his initial appointment till the date of his superannuation which had occasioned on 31.12.2020. 11. Accordingly, by reckoning the petitioner to have continued in his Page No.# 10/11 services and superannuated therefrom, as a Grade-IV employee, the pension and pensionary benefits of the petitioner be now computed and released to the petitioner. It is clarified that the petitioner’s qualifying services for pension, shall be reckoned from the date of his initial appointment as a Grade-IV employee till the petitioner had superannuated from his services w.e.f 31.12.2020. This Court having now required the respondents to construe the petitioner to have continued in his services even after his promotion to the post of Assistant Teacher, as a Grade-IV employee, a question would now arise as to whether the pay and allowances drawn by the petitioner as an Assistant Teacher would be mandated to be recovered. 12. As noticed, hereinabove, the petitioner was permitted to continue in his services as an Assistant Teacher, till the date of his superannuation by the Respondent Authorities and the materials brought on record does not reveal that the petitioner had in any manner mis-represented before the Respondent Authorities which had led to his promotion to the cadre of Assistant Teacher from the Grade-IV cadre. 13. Considering the fact that the petitioner had continued in his services as an Assistant Teacher and had retired from his services way back on 31.12.2020, while this Court requires the Respondent Authorities to deem the period of services rendered by the petitioner as an Assistant Teacher to be service rendered by him as a Grade-IV employee, for the purpose of Page No.# 11/11 computing his pension and pensionary benefits, the salaries drawn by the petitioner against the promotional post of Assistant Teacher be not recovered from him, inasmuch as, such recovery at this stage is found by this Court to be iniquitous. 14. Accordingly, in view of the above conclusions reached by this Court, the Respondent Authorities are directed to finalize the pension and pensionary benefits of the petitioner strictly in terms of the directions passed, hereinabove, and release to him the amounts due, thereunder, within a period of 03 (three) months from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order. 15. With the above observations and directions, the present writ petition stands disposed of. JUDGE Comparing Assistant