GUWAHATI, India, Aug. 12 -- Gauhati High Court issued the following order on July 14:
1. Heard Mr. M. Goswami, learned Senior counsel assisted by Mr. R. Sinha, learned counsel for the petitioners in WP(C) No. 5741/2017; Ms. R. Devi, learned counsel for the petitioners in WP(C) Nos. 6020/2017, 5861/2017, 5933/2017; Mr. A. Nath, learned counsel for the petitioners in WP(C) No. 4126/2016 with I.A.(C) No. 1222/2023, WP(C) No. 4181/2016 with I.A.(C) No. 1085/2023, WP(C) No. 4358/2016 with I.A.(C) No. 1089/2023 WP(C) No. 122/2018 with I.A.(C) No. 1092/2023 & WP(C) No. 124/2018 with I.A.(C) No. 1225/2023; Ms. K. Devi, learned counsel for the petitioners in WP(C)Nos. 5158/2016, 5176/2016, 510/2018, 3436/2021, 4279/ 2021, 3654/2022; Mr. Y.S. Mannan, learned counsel for the petitioners in WP(C) No. 261/2017; Mr. M. Deka, learned counsel for the petitioners in WP(C) No. 3038/2017 and Mr. C. Goswami, learned counsel for the petitioners in WP(C) Nos. 4113/2018, 7281/2018 & 8367/2022.
2. Also heard Mr. S. Bora, learned Standing counsel, BTC and Mr. B. Gogoi, learned Additional Advocate General, Assam representing the respondent Finance Department.
3. The grievance/challenge: The petitioners herein are all Assistant Teachers, working under different Lower Primary (L.P.) and Middle English (M.E.) Schools under the Bodoland Territorial Council (hereinafter referred to as BTC).This batch of writ petitions is taken up together for final determination as the facts and the issues involved are same i.e. claim of salary from the date of alleged regularization in the year 2015, (hereinafter referred to as 1st Regularization) after withdrawal of termination orders in terms of a policy decision taken by BTC. The petitioners claim that there is no scope of the regularization made in the year 2022 & 2024, (hereinafter referred to as 2nd Regularization) with prospective effect, whereby their right to salaries for the period of service rendered since the date of 1st Regularization has been taken away though, their services had been extracted by the BTC.
4. Necessary facts: The necessary facts required for proper adjudication are recorded as follows:
i. These petitioners were appointed on different dates in the year 1999 by the jurisdictional Deputy Inspector of Schools, Nalbari, prior to creation of BTC.
ii. These petitioners were terminated from their services under separate orders during the year 2009/2010 treating them to be illegally/irregularly appointed teachers inasmuch as the ground for termination were to the effect that there was no advertisement prior to the selection, there was no approval of the State Level Empowered Committee of the personal Department of the Government of Assam to fill up these posts and that there was no record of holding any interview and preparation of score sheets by the interview Board etc.
iii. These petitioners, along with similarly situated teachers, approached this Court challenging such termination orders by filing separate writ petitions. Such termination orders were interfered by this Court, primarily for the reason that while terminating these teachers, principle of natural justice was violated i.e., the termination orders were issued without affording any opportunity of hearing to the petitioners. Accordingly, the BTC authorities were granted liberty to issue show cause notices and take fresh decisions.
*Rest of the document can be viewed at: (https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/ecourtindiaHC/cases/display_pdf.php?filename=zDLovBVSUw02H8XukOjXfAyqPMrj5K891vuCFWzPybjhbEqRyCba7JqyPRWg3I5e&caseno=WP(C)/3654/2022&cCode=1&cino=GAHC010096312022&state_code=6&appFlag=)
Disclaimer: Curated by HT Syndication.
