Page No.# 1/6 GAHC010030792026 2026:GAU-AS:3747 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : WP(C)/961/2026 KHAIRUL ISLAM S/O- LATE SHIRAZ ALI, R/O- VILL- BARCHAPORI, P.O- GOROIMARI PATHAR, DIST- MORIGAON, ASSAM, PIN-782126, VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM AND OTHRS REP. BY THE SECRETARY TO THE GOVT. OF ASSAM, SCHOOL EDUCATION DEPARTMENT, DISPUR, GUWAHATI-06, ASSAM 2:THE DIRECTOR OF ELEMENTARY EDUCATION KAHILIPARA GUWAHATI-19 3:THE DISTRICT ELEMENTARY EDUCATION OFFICER MORIGAON ASSAM PIN-782105 4:THE BLOCK ELEMENTARY EDUCATION OFFICER LAHARIGHAT EDUCATION BLOCK P.O- LAHARIGHAT DIST- MORIGAON ASSAM PIN-782127 5:THE NEW SCHOOL MANAGEMENT COMMITTEE OF BARCHAPORI ADARSHA M.R MADRASSA REP. BY ITS PRESIDENT MONIR UDDIN S/O- LATE SAMSUDDIN Page No.# 2/6 VILL- BARCHAPORI P.O- GOROIMARI PATHAR DIST- MORIGAON ASSAM PIN-78212 Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. B RAHMAN, Advocate for the Respondent : SC, ELEM. EDU, BEFORE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE N. UNNI KRISHNAN NAIR ORDER 11/03/2026 Heard Mr. B Rahman, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. P K Bora, learned Standing counsel, Elementary Education Department for the respondents. 2. The present writ petition has been instituted assailing a communication dated 28.11.2025 issued by the District Elementary Education Officer, Morigaon, directing the Block Elementary Education Officer, to remove the President of Barchapori Adarsha M.E. Madrassa from the post and to reconstitute the School Managing Committee (SMC) in accordance with the provisions of Section 21 of the Right to Education Act, 2009. The petitioner has also assailed the communication dated 05.02.2026, by which the jurisdictional District Elementary Education Officer had granted approval to the reconstituted School Managing Committee of the said school. 3. The School Managing Committee of Barchapori Adarsha M.E. Madrassa was constituted with the petitioner as its President in the meeting dated 16.11.2023. The constitution of the said School Managing Committee was approved by the jurisdictional District Elementary Education Officer vide communication dated 23.11.2023. Thereafter, on complaints coming on record with regard to the eligibility of the petitioner, Page No.# 3/6 herein, to hold the post of President of the School Managing Committee of the school in question, the impugned communication dated 28.11.2025 was issued by the jurisdictional District Elementary Education Officer, requiring removal of the petitioner from the post of President of the School Managing Committee of the school in question and for reconstitution of the School Managing Committee. Accordingly, the petitioner was removed from the post of President of the School Managing Committee and the same was reconstituted as per the procedure prescribed. The District Elementary Education Officer vide communication dated 05.02.2025 granted approval to the reconstituted Managing Committee. Being aggrieved, the petitioner has instituted the present proceedings. 4. Mr. B Rahman, learned counsel for the petitioner, by reiterating the facts noticed, hereinabove, has submitted that the removal of the petitioner was not preceded by issuance of a notice to him, intimating him the complaints existing in the matter against him and affording an opportunity of hearing to him. Accordingly, he submits that the removal of the petitioner being vitiated, the same would mandate an interference by this Court. He further submits that in the event his removal is so interfered with by this Court, the reconstituted School Managing Committee would also mandate to be set aside, with a direction to the respondents to permit the School Managing Committee with the petitioner as its President to continue till completion of its term. 5. Per contra, Mr. P K Bora, learned Standing counsel, Elementary Education Department, on instructions, has submitted that the petitioner was not co-operating with the Headmaster of the school in discharging his duties and had refused to sign the cheques relating to the Mid-Day Meal (MDM) Scheme, which had resulted in causing inconvenience to the children studying in the school. 5.1 Mr. Bora, learned Standing counsel, Elementary Education Department further submits that the petitioner by projecting himself to be a parent of a child studying in the said school had got himself elected as the President of the School Managing Committee. However, on receipt of complaints, an enquiry was made, wherein, it was found that no children of the petitioner was studying in the said school, on the date, when the said School Managing Page No.# 4/6 Committee was so constituted with the petitioner as its President. 5.2 It is also contended by Mr. Bora, learned Standing counsel, Elementary Education Department that the petitioner is also not a legal guardian of any student studying in the said school. Accordingly, the approval granted to the School Managing Committee with the petitioner as its President, being found to be in violation of the procedure mandated for constitution of such School Managing Committee, the direction came to be issued for removal of the petitioner from the post of President of the School Managing Committee of the school in question. 5.3 Mr. Bora, learned Standing counsel, Elementary Education Department, in the above premises, submits that no prejudice was caused to the petitioner, herein, inasmuch as, he was from the very date of constitution of the said School Managing Committee with him as its President, ineligible to be so elected as President of the said School Managing Committee. 6. I have heard the learned counsels for the parties and also perused the materials available on record. 7. The submissions made by Mr. P K Bora, learned Standing counsel, Elementary Education Department as well as the documents relied upon by him, have brought on record the fact that the petitioner, on the date he was elected as the President of the School Managing Committee of Barchapori Adarsha M.E. Madrassa did not have any of his children studying in the said school. The petitioner was elected as the President of the School Managing Committee of Barchapori Adarsha M.E. Madrassa, by projecting himself to be a Parent/Guardian of a child studying in the school at the relevant point of time. The said projection being made in respect of the petitioner, the jurisdictional District Elementary Education Officer, proceeded to grant approval to the constituted School Managing Committee, with the petitioner as its President. 8. The norms for constitution as well as the powers and functions of a School Managing Committee is provided under the provisions of the Assam Right of Children to Free and Compulsory Education Act, 2011. Section 13(1)(ii)(b) of the said Act of 2011 mandates that the President and Vice President of such School Managing Committee shall be Page No.# 5/6 selected/elected from the parents/guardians members only and one of them must be a woman. 9. On a perusal of the pleadings brought on record by the petitioner in the writ petition, it is found that no statement has been made to the effect that on the date of constitution of the School Managing Committee, his child was studying in the school. No projection was also made to the effect that the petitioner was the guardian of a child studying in the school. Accordingly, in view of the provisions of Section 13(1)(ii)(b) of the said Act of 2011, the petitioner was clearly ineligible to function as the President of the School Managing Committee of the school in question. 10. The above position as coming on record from the submissions made by Mr. P K Bora, learned Standing counsel, Elementary Education Department was not disputed by Mr. B Rahman, learned counsel for the petitioner. 11. Accordingly, in view of the ineligibility of the petitioner to be selected/elected as the President of the School Managing Committee of Barchapori Adarsha M.E. Madrassa, as he is not a parent/guardian of a child studying in the said school, the removal of the petitioner from the post of President, in the considered view of this Court, is not erroneous, inasmuch as, the initial selection/election of the petitioner is found by this Court to be in violation of the provisions of Section 13(1)(ii)(b) of the Assam Right of Children to Free and Compulsory Education Act, 2011. 12. Mr. B Rahman, learned counsel for the petitioner has made a feeble attempt to develop submissions to the effect that the children of his brother studying in the said school, he be deemed to be a guardian of the said children. The said plea raised by Mr. Rahman, would not mandate an acceptance from this Court, inasmuch as, there is no material brought on record in the writ petition to justify the said position. Accordingly, the said submissions also would not mandate acceptance by this Court. 13. In view of the above conclusions reached by this Court, the removal of the petitioner as the President of the School Managing Committee of Barchapori Adarsha M.E. Madrassa, in the considered view of this Court, would not mandate any interference. Page No.# 6/6 14. Accordingly, the present writ petition is found to be devoid of any merit and consequently, the same stands dismissed. However, there would be no order as to cost. JUDGE Comparing Assistant