Page No.# 1/8 GAHC010147652021 2026:GAU-AS:6535 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : WP(C)/4864/2021 ABDUL MALEK S/O ABU TAHER MUNCHI, VILLAGE RANGESWARI, PO NAGARBERA, DIST KAMRUP , ASSAM 781127 VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM AND 3 ORS. THROUGH THE SECRETARY TO THE GOVT. OF ASSAM, ELEMENTARY EDUCATION, DISPUR GUWAHATI 06 2:THE DIRECTOR OF ELEMENTARY EDUCATION ASSAM KAHILIPARA GUWAHATI 19 3:THE DISTRICT ELEMENTARY EDUCATION OFFICER KAMRUP DIST KAMRUP ASSAM 4:THE DISTRICT SCRUTINY COMMITTEE KAMRUP REPRESENTED BY ITS CHAIRPERSON CUM DEPUTY COMMISSIONER KAMRUP ASSA Advocate for the Petitioner : MR M H AHMED, MS. N SULTANA Advocate for the Respondent : GA, ASSAM, SC, ELEM. EDU Page No.# 2/8 BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE KARDAK ETE Date on which judgment is reserved : NA Date of pronouncement of judgment : 12.05.2026 Whether the pronouncement is of the operative of the judgment? : No Whether the full judgment has been pronounced? : Yes JUDGEMENT (ORAL) Heard Mr. M. H. Ahmed, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. A. Phukan, learned Standing Counsel, Elementary Education Department for respondent Nos. 1 to 4. 2. By filing this writ petition, the petitioner has prayed for a direction to the respondent authorities to provincialize his service as Arabic Teacher at Rangeswari M.E. Madrassa with all service benefits with effect from the date on which the services of the other employees of the said school have been provincialized in terms of Section 3(1)(xi) of the Assam Education (Provincialization of Services of Teachers and Re-organization of Educational Institutions) Act, 2017 (hereinafter referred to as “Assam Education Provincialization Act, 2017”) and the Schedule appended to the Right of Children to Free and Compulsory Education Act, 2009. 3. The facts of the case, in brief, are that the petitioner was appointed as Page No.# 3/8 Arabic Teacher in the year 1985 by the Secretary of the Managing Committee of Rangeswari M.E. Madrassa in which posthe joined on 15.11.1986 and since then, he has been serving continuously in the said school without any salary. The Rangeswari M.E. Madrassa is captured in Data Information System of Education (DISE)being DISE code No. 18060204004 from the academic session 2008-2009, wherein the name of the petitioner is entered as Arabic Teacher at Sl. No. 3. 4. Vide order dated 07.12.1999, the District Elementary Education Officer, Kamrup approved the resolution of the School Management Committee for appointment of 10 (ten) employees, including the petitioner. The District Scrutiny Committee constituted under Section 10 of the Assam Venture Educational Institutions (Provincialization of Services) Act, 2011 (hereinafter referred to as “Act of 2011”) (now repealed) had recommended provincialization of the said school and services of the staff and teachers including the petitioner as Arabic Teacher. However, while provincializing several other M.E. Madrassas and the services of their staff members and teachers including other Arabic Teachers, the respondent authorities did not provincialize the service of the petitioner. The petitioner claims that he possesses the required qualification for provincialization under Section 3(1)(xi) of the Assam Education Provincialization Act, 2017 as language teacher in the said Rangeswari M.E. Madrassa. 5. Thereafter, the District Scrutiny Committee, Kamrup had recommended the names of 4 (four) employees, including the petitioner, for provincialization of their services considering the enrolment figures for the years 2014, 2015 & 2016, being 94, 102 & 98, respectively, wherien the petitioner taught Arabic Page No.# 4/8 subject. Despite the eligibility of the petitioner for provincialization of his service, by order dated 04.02.2021, the respondent authorities provincialized the services of one Mr. Nasrul Islam, Headmaster; Abdul Mazid, Assistant Teacher; and Akram Hussain, Science Teacher, as tutors, but did not provincialize the service of the petitioner. 6. Mr. M. H. Ahmed, learned counsel for the petitioner, submits that the petitioner was appointed in the year 1985 as Arabic Teacher in the Rangeswari M.E. Madrassa. As per the provision of Section 3(i)(xi) of the Assam Education Provincialization Act, 2017, the petitioner is entitled to provincialization of his service as languageteacher being eligible in all respects. Therefore, he submits that the respondent authorities may be directed to provincialize the service of the petitioner as language teacher in Arabic subject at Rangeswari M.E. Madrassa. 7. Per contra, Mr. A. Phukan, learned Standing Counsel, Elementary Education Department, while referring to the educational and professional qualifications of teachers of Rangeswari M.E. Madrassa, submits that out of the 3 (three) teachers whose services have been provincialized, one Mr. Abdul Mazid, whose service has been provincialized as language teacher, had joined on 15.01.1986, whereas the petitioner has joined on 15.11.1986 as Arabic Teacher. Therefore, the said teacher being senior to the petitioner, the petitioner has no right to claim for provincialization of his service as language teacher in terms of the provisions of the Assam Education Provincialization Act, 2017. 8. Considered the submissions of learned counsel for the parties and also Page No.# 5/8 perused the materials available on record. 9. Pursuant to the enactment of the Right of Children to Free and Compulsory Education Act, 2009 with a view to provide free and compulsory primary education to all children between the age group of 6-14 years, the State of Assam has enacted the Assam Venture Educational Institutions (Provincialisation of Services) Act, 2011 for provincialization of services of the employees of the venture educational institutions in the State. Under the said Act, a large number of venture M.E schools in Assam were provincialized and the employees have got the benefits of provincializationand the post of Arabic Teachers in the Schools have also been provincialized under the Act of 2011. 10. Vide judgment and order dated 23.09.2016 passed in WP(C) No. 3190/2012, the Assam Venture Educational Institutions (Provincialisation of Services) Act, 2011 has been struck down being unconstitutional. Thereafter, the State has enacted the Assam Education Provincialization Act, 2017 to provincialize the services of the teachers of the Venture Educational Institutions and to re-organize and streamline the educational institutions up to the degree level in the State of Assam, so as to confirm to the prevailing statutory norms and standards. 11. The grievance of the petitioner in the present case is with regard to non- provincialization of his service as language teacher in Arabic subject at Rangeswari M.E. Madrassa in terms of the Assam Education Provincialization Act, 2017 and the provisions of the Right of Children to Free and Compulsory Education Act, 2009. The petitioner appears to have been appointed in the year Page No.# 6/8 1985 as Arabic Teacher and joined his service on 15.11.1986. The person whose service has been provincialized as language teacher had joined his service on 15.01.1986, which is prior to the joining date of the petitioner. 12. Having considered the specific prayer of the petitioner for a direction to the respondent authorities to provincialize his service in terms of Section 3(1) (xi) of the Assam Education Provincialization Act, 2017, I deem it appropriate to refer to the said provisions, which are reproduced herein below:- “3. Eligibility criteria for selection of educational institution for provincialisation of services of teachers/tutors:- (1) Subject to the provisions of Article 30 of the Constitution of India, the following categories of Venture Educational Institutions shall be eligible for being considered for provincialisation of the services of their teachers and tutors:- (i) ………….. ……….(xi) In case of Venture Upper Primary School there shall be minimum three teachers or tutors at least one teacher each for (a) Science and Mathematics (b) Social Studies and (c) Languages: Provided that for additional posts it shall be considered in accordance with the norms and standard stipulated in the Schedule under Sections 19 and 25 of the Right of Children to Free and Compulsory Education Act, 2009 (Central Act No. 35 of 2009)” 13. Bare perusal of the above provisions shows that for a Venture Upper Primary School there shall be a minimum of three teachers or tutors at least one Page No.# 7/8 teacher each for Science and Mathematics, Social Studies and Languages and for additional posts it shall be considered in accordance with the norms and standards stipulated in the Schedule under Sections 19 and 25 of the Right of Children to Free and Compulsory Education Act, 2009. Thus, it is clear that for each Venture Upper Primary School there shall be minimum three teachers or tutors at least one teacher each for Science and Mathematics, Social Studies and Languages. On consideration of the above provision, it is seen that there may a scope for additional teachers. However, such additional posts shall be considered in accordance with the norms and standard as per the Right of Children to Free and Compulsory Education Act, 2009. 14. Having considered that the person whose service has already been provincialized as Language Teacher is senior to the petitioner, ordinarily the petitioner may not have an enforceable right to claim provincialization of his service as Language Teacher.However, the provisions of Section 3(1)(xi) of the Assam Education Provincialization Act, 2017, provides for a scope of additional post as the same provides that there shall be a minimum three teachers or tutors at least one teacher each for each of the subject and out of the three subjects including the languages, I am of the view that the respondent authorities may reconsider the case of the petitioner, as the provisions provides for a scope to provincialized additional teachers as per the standards stipulated in the schedule under Sections 19 and 25 of the Right of Children to Free and Compulsory Education Act, 2009, as it appears that no consideration has been made in that direction. 15. In view of above, this Court is of the considered opinion that the Page No.# 8/8 respondent authorities may reconsider the case of the petitioner in the light of the provisions contained in Section 3(1)(xi) of the Assam Education Provincialization Act, 2017, particularly with regard to the scope for provincialization of additional teachers in accordance with the prescribed norms and standards, as it appears that no consideration has been made in that regard. 16. In view of discussion and observations made herein above, the present writ petition is disposed of with a direction to the respondent authorities to reconsider the case of the petitioner in terms of the provisions of Section 3(1) (xi) of the Assam Education Provincialization Act, 2017. However, it is made clear that the observations made hereinabove shall not be construed as a mandamus directing provincialization of the service of the petitioner. 17. The petitioner is directed to file representation before the appropriate authorities within a period of 20(twenty) days from today. On receipt of the representation that may be filed by the petitioner as directed herein above, the respondent authorities shall consider the case of the petitioner within a period of 4(four) months thereafter. 18. In terms of above directions and observations, the present writ petition is disposed of. No order as to cost(s). JUDGE Comparing Assistant