Gauhati High Court
Md. Afazuddin Ahmed vs The State Of Assam And 5 Ors on 18 November, 2021
Page No.# 1/3
GAHC010177652021
THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT
(HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)
Case No. : WA/291/2021
MD. AFAZUDDIN AHMED
H/T. MILAN H.S PANIGAON, S/O- LATE DHRAMSHA SHEIKH, VILL.-
BARKHETRI BORNI, P.O. BELSOR, P.S. BELSOR, DIST.- NALBARI, ASSAM
VERSUS
1: THE STATE OF ASSAM AND 5 ORS.
TO BE REP. BY THE COMMISSIONER AND SECRETARY TO THE GOVT. OF
ASSAM, SECONDARY EDUCATION DEPARTMENT, ASSAM, DISPUR,
GUWAHATI-6.
2:THE COMMISSIONER AND SECRETARY TO THE GOVT. OF ASSAM
FINANCE DEPARTMENT ASSAM DISPUR GUWAHATI-6.
3:THE DIRECTOR OF SECONDARY EDUCATION
ASSAM KAHILIPARA GUWAHATI-19.
4:THE DIRECTOR OF PENSION
ASSAM HOUSEFED COMPLEX NEW BUILDING DISPUR-6.
5:TTHE INSPECTOR OF SCHOOLS NDC
NALBARI P.O. P.S. AND DIST.- NALBARI ASSAM
6:THE TREASURY OFFICER
NALBARI P.O. P.S. AND DIST.- NALBARI ASSAM
Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. A M BARBHUIYA
Advocate for the Respondent : GA, ASSAM
Page No.# 2/3
-BEFORE-
HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR. SUDHANSHU DHULIA
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SOUMITRA SAIKIA
ORDER
Date : 18-11-2021
Heard Mr. A.M. Barbhuiya, learned counsel for the appellant. Also
heard Mr. K.P. Pathak, learned standing counsel, Education (Secondary)
Department, appearing for the respondent Nos.1, 3 & 5; Mr. B. Gogoi,
learned standing counsel, Finance Department, appearing for the
respondent No.2 and Mr. N. Das, learned counsel, appearing for the
respondent Nos.4 & 6.
By filing the present writ appeal, the appellant has challenged the
judgment dated 04.10.2021 passed by the learned Single Judge in WP(C)
No.5187/2021.
The writ appellant before this Court was the petitioner before the
learned Single Judge and was aggrieved by the fact that since he had
worked as a graduate teacher, he was not getting the regular pension of a
graduate teacher although he is getting a provisional pension. The
petitioner had, therefore, filed a writ petition before this Court which went
before the learned Single Judge and the relief sought by the petitioner was
that since he retired as a graduate teacher, he is liable to be given the
pension of a graduate teacher.
The learned Single Judge had disposed of the writ petition by
giving certain directions to the Director of Secondary Education where it has
been clearly stated that in case the petitioner is a graduate teacher, he is
liable to be given pension of a graduate teacher.
Page No.# 3/3
The appellant/writ petitioner is only aggrieved by the fact that
although directions had been given to the Director of Secondary Education
to pass order therein but no opportunity has been given to the
appellant/writ petitioner to present his case before the Director of
Secondary Education the fact that he is indeed a graduate teacher. He has
not been given the opportunity to place the relevant facts and documents
before the Director concerned.
To this extent, without interfering with the judgment passed by the
learned Single Judge, we make it clear that in the enquiry as directed by the
learned Single Judge, the appellant/writ petitioner would be at liberty to
place all the relevant documents.
With the above observation, the writ appeal stands disposed of.
JUDGE CHIEF JUSTICE
Comparing Assistant
