Gauhati High Court
Page No.# 1/4 vs Afzalur Rahman And 9 Ors on 31 July, 2024
Author: Sanjay Kumar Medhi
Bench: Sanjay Kumar Medhi
Page No.# 1/4
GAHC010060452024
THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT
(HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)
Case No. : Review.Pet./118/2024
STATE OF ASSAM
THROUGH THE SECRETARY TO THE GOVT. OF ASSAM, DEPTT. OF
SCHOOL EDUCATION, DISPUR, KAMRUP (METRO), ASSAM, PIN- 781006.
2: THE DIRECTOR OF ELEMENTARY EDUCATION
KAHILIPARA
KAMRUP (M)
ASSAM
PIN-781019
VERSUS
AFZALUR RAHMAN AND 9 ORS.
S/O. HABIBUR RAHMAN, VILL. SAGOLCHARA PART-III, P.S. DHUBRI, DIST.
DHUBRI, ASSAM, PIN-783324.
2:ABDUR ROUF SARKER
S/O. SK MOZIBOR ROHMAN
VILL. KHARUABANDHA
P.S. SOUTH SALMARA
DIST. SOUTH SALMARA MANKACHAR
ASSAM.
3:ZAKIR HUSSAIN
S/O. ABUBAKKAR SIDDIQUE
VILL. ADABARI PART-II
P.S. DHUBRI
DIST. DHUBRI
ASSAM
PIN-783324.
4:PRODIP NATH
S/O. DINARAM NATH
VILL. BARUABARI
Page No.# 2/4
P.S. GARMUR
DIST. MAJULI
ASSAM
PIN-785106.
5:SOHRAB AHMED
S/O. MD. AFSAR ALI
VILL. KAWAIMARI EXCESS AREA
P.O. NALIGAON
DIST. BARPETA
ASSAM
PIN-4781352.
6:NAZMUL HOQUE
S/O. ALAUDDIN SHEIKH
VILL. KACHUDOLA PART-II
P.O. KHELUAPARA
DIST. BONGAIGAON
ASSAM.
7:RASHIDUL ISLAM AKAND
S/O. HABIBAR RAHMAN AKAND
VILL. ADABARI PART-II
P.S. DHUBRI
DIST. DHUBRI
ASSAM
PIN-783324.
8:SHAHJAHAN AHMED
S/O. MD. MOHFIZUL HOQUE
VILL. PATHURIA
P.S. MANKACHAR
DIST. SOUTH SALMARA MANKACHAR
ASSAM
PIN-783131.
9:NURUL ISLAM KHAN
S/O. MOHAR ALI KHAN
VILL. FALIMARI PART-II
P.S. GAURIPUR
DIST. DHUBRI
ASSAM
PIN-783325.
10:ASHRAFUZZAMAN SHEIKH
S/O. MD. BAKTOZAMAN SK
VILL. NEW FERAMARI
Page No.# 3/4
P.S. SOUTH SALMARA
DIST. SOUTH SALMARA MANKACHAR
ASSAM
PIN-783135
Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. R MAZUMDAR,
Advocate for the Respondent : ,
BEFORE
HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR MEDHI
ORDER
31.07.2024 Heard Shri R. Mazumdar, learned counsel for the review applicant, who by means of this application, has sought for review of the judgment and order dated 21.12.2021 passed by this Court in a bunch of writ petitions including WP(C)/1183/2020.
Shri Mazumdar, learned counsel by referring to the observations made by this Court in paragraph 5 of the judgment has submitted that this Court had proceeded with the presumption that all the petitioners were possessing TET/D.EI Ed. Qualification before the advertisement dated 11.03.2018. The learned counsel has, however, submitted that a perusal of the averments made in paragraph 12 of the writ petition would make it clear that the TET qualification was obtained pursuant to the examination held in the year 2019 and the petitioner nos. 1 to 9 obtained D.EI Ed. in 2019 and the petitioner no. 10 does not have D.EI Ed but has B. Ed and therefore, the writ petitioners were not having the requisite qualification as on the date of the advertisement.
Let notice be issued, returnable by 4 (four) weeks.
Let steps for service of notice upon the respondents be taken by registered Page No.# 4/4 post with A/D within 2 days.
Accordingly, list this case after 4 weeks along with service report.
Tag this matter along with Review Pet. 137/2023.
JUDGE Comparing Assistant