Gauhati High Court
Afrin Mahfuz Tapadar vs Binod Karmakar And 53 Ors on 14 June, 2022
Page No.# 1/13
GAHC010107362022
THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT
(HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)
Case No. : Review.Pet./97/2022
AFRIN MAHFUZ TAPADAR
W/O JUBEYER AHMED LASKAR,
RESIDENT OF VILLAGE BHABANIPUR, PO AMALA, PS LALA, DIST
HAILAKANDI, ASSAM 788164
VERSUS
BINOD KARMAKAR AND 53 ORS.
S/O BIKASH KARMAKAR, VILL. AND P.O. KHAIRABARI, DIST. BARPETA,
ASSAM, PIN 78135
2:PURABI BARUAH
C/O RANJAN BARUAH
HOUE NO. 4
VILL. KALITAPARA
P.O. AZARA
DIST. KAMRUP (M)
ASSAM
PIN 781017
3:NAZMA BEGUM
C/O NAZIR ALI
VILL. MAHIPALKUCHI
P.O. BALIKUCHI
DIST .KAMRUP (R) (ASSAM)
PIN 781381
4:GITANJALI HAZARIKA
C/O RANJIT DEKA
VILL. BARBARI
P.O. BURHA
DIST. DARRANG
Page No.# 2/13
ASSAM
PIN 784148
5:LIPIKA DEVI
C/O GOPAL DAS
VILL. WORD NO. 6 SASANPATTI
P.O. MANALDOI
DIST. DARRANG
ASSAM
PIN 784125
6:SADHAN GHOSH
S/O SUBAL GHOSH
VILL. ATAGAON
P.O. MAIRAJHAR
DIST. BAKSA (BTAD)
PIN 781315
ASSAM.
7:MD KAPIL HUSSAIN
S/O MD. RAFIQUE HUSSAIN
VILL. GERAMARI PT-V
P.O. GERAMARI
DIST. DHUBRI
ASSAM
PIN 783339
8:RUBIA KHATUN
D/O. MD. AZIZUR RAHMAN
VILL. UDALI KACHARI GAON
P.O. UDALI BAZAR
P.S. LANKA
DIST. HOJAI
PIN 782446
ASSAM.
9:MRIDUPABAN SARMAH
C/O PROFULLA SARMAH
VILL. BARICHOWA BRAHMIN GAON
P.O. MUDOIGAON
DIST. GOLAGHAT
PIN 785614
10:KRISHNA CHAUHAN
S/O BASUDEO CHAUHAN
VILL. WATIZOR NO. 2
P.O. WATIZOR NO. 2
P.S. KHERONI
Page No.# 3/13
DIST. WEST KARBI ANGLONG
PIN 782446
ASSAM.
11:BARUN SUTRADHAR
S/O BRINDABAN SUTRADHAR
VILL. JAKHLIPAR
P.O. SIMLAGURI
P.S. GOBARDHANA
DIST. BAKSA
PIN 781313
ASSAM.
12:PARTHA BASAK
S/O PRABHAT BASAK
VILL. KATAJHAR PATHAR
P.O. KATAJHAR
DIST. BARPETA
PIN 71315
ASSAM.
13:RANJAN SUTRADHAR
S/O ASHOK SUTRADHAR
VILL. BELGURI
P.O. GUWAGACHA
P.S. GOBARDHANA
DIST. BAKSA
PIN 781313
ASSAM.
14:MRIDUL DUTTA
S/O BIREN DUTTA
VILL. RATANPUR
P.O. BARBANG
DIST. BARPETA
ASSAM
PIN 781325
15:DIPIKA DEBNATH
C/O PRABHASH DEBNATH
VILL. KALAHABHANGA WARD NO. 3
P.O. BARPETA ROAD
DIST. BARPETA
PIN 781315
16:SUMI BARMAN
W/O DEEPJYOTI PATHAK
VILL. JAKHLIRPAR
Page No.# 4/13
P.O. SIMLAGURI
DIST. BAKSA
ASSAM
PIN 781313
17:MITHUN NATH
S/O MANORANJAN NATH
VILL. NAMATI
P.O. HATINAMATI
DIST. NALBARI
ASSAM
PIN 781337
18:GEETIKA SARMA
D/O NARAYAN CH. SARMA
VILL. BALIPARA
P.O. BHALUKI
DIST. BARPETA
ASSAM
PIN 781371
19:KULDIP MEDHI
S/O DILIP KUMAR MEDHI
VILL. PATHSALA GAON
P.O. PATHSALA
DIST. BARPETA
ASSAM
PIN 781325
20:APURBA DAS
S/O SURJYA DAS
VILL. BORI
P.O. BORI
DIST. NALBARI
ASSAM
PIN 781338
21:BIPRO BHUSAN GOSWAMI
S/O BIMAN BIHARI GOSWAMI
VILL. AND P.O. MIRJAPUR
DIST. KARIMGANJ
ASSAM
PIN 788701
22:SAIDUL ISLAM
S/O SHOMEZ UDDIN
VILL. SATSIA
P.O. JAMADARHAT
Page No.# 5/13
DIST. DHUBRI
ASSAM
PIN 783330
23:BABAR ALI
S/O JAMAL UDDIN
VILL. DABANDIA
P.O. GUNIAL GURI
P.S. KALGACHIA
DIST. BARPETA
PIN 781319
ASSAM.
24:DHIRAJ KUMAR
C/O TARUN KUMAR
VILL. MIRZA
P.O. MIRZA
DIST. KAMRUP (ASSAM)
PIN 781125
25:PRIYANKA SARKAR
C/O SUBHASH SARKAR
VILL. BHASKAR NAGAR
P.O. BINOVA NAGAR
DIST. KAMRUP
PIN 781018
26:NABANITA BARMAN
C/O JYOTI PRASAD DAS
VILL. AND P.O. BORI
DIST.NALBARI
ASSAM
PIN 781338
27:MILIJULI DUTTA
C/O DHANESWAR DUTTA
VILL. BADANKUCHI
P.O. BHOTANTA SADERI
DIST. BARPETA
PIN 781325
28:BAHARUL ISLAM
C/O BAHADUR ISLAM
VILL. SATSIA
P.O. JAMADARHAT
DIST. DHUBRI
ASSAM
PIN 783330
Page No.# 6/13
29:SUSMITA BHATTACHARJEE
D/O SWAPAN KR. BHATTACHARJEE
VILL. SUSMITA BHATTACHARJEE LALA VIVEKANANDA ROAD
W/O NO. 7
P.O. LALA
DIST. HAILAKANDI
PIN 788163
30:ATOWAR RAHMAN
C/O ABDUL RAZZAQUE
VILL. BORO PAITARY
P.O. JOYBHUM
DIST. GOALPARA
PIN 783129
31:GITAMANI DAS
D/O SOMESWAR DAS
VILL. NO. 1 GERIMARI
P.O. MANGALDOI
DIST. DARRANG
PIN 784125
32:JAHAR UDDIN
CO SHAHEB UDDIN
VILL. BANTIPUR
P.O. JARABARI
DIST. BARPETA
PIN 781314
33:TAPASH PAUL
C/O AKHIL PAUL
VILL. AND P.O. DALGOMA
DIST. GOALPARA
PIN 783125
34:MOMINUR ISLAM
S/O ABDUL MOZID MIAH
VILL. SIMLABARI
P.O. SIMLABARI
DIST. GOALPARA
ASSAM
PIN 783330
35:RUPABATI SUTRADHAR
C/O DHARMESWAR SUTRADHAR
VILL. CHOWKAPARA
DORAPARA
Page No.# 7/13
P.O. AGIA
DIST. GOALPARA
PIN 783120
36:JAHAR ALI
S/O JAMIR UDDIN
VILL. RANIPUKHURI
P.O. KAZIAMATI
P.S. UDALGURI
DIST. UDALGURI
ASSAM
PIN 784509
37:MARAMI DAS
C/O DHANI RAM DAS
VILL. GOWALHATI
P.O. SIKARHATI
DIST. KAMRUP
PIN 781125
38:MANALISHA SARMAH
D/O MEDINI SARMAH
VILL. AND P.O. GANGMOUTHAN
DIST. BISWANATH (ASSAM)
PIN 784167
39:BABILON BORA
D/O LATE NAREN CH. BORA
VILL. RUPAIBARI
P.O. AHATGURI
DIST. MORIGAON
PIN 782412
40:ABDUL WAHID SARKAR
S/O ABU SAYED SARKAR
VILL. BHELAKOBA
P.O. KHUDIMARI
DIST. DHUBRI
ASSAM
PIN 783331
41:TABASSUM HAZARIKA
D/O DILWAR HUSSAIN HAZARIKA
VILL. K.B. ROAD
WORD NO. 13
P.O. NORTH LAKHIMPUR
DIST. LAKHIMPUR
ASSAM
Page No.# 8/13
PIN 787001
42:MANASHI BORAH
D/O SUBHASH BORAH
VILL. AND P.O. PATBAUSHI
DIST. BARPETA
PIN 781314
43:MISS PRIYANKA DEY
D/O PARESH DEY
VILL. JOYPUR FALTUTULA GAON
P.O. JOYPUR
DIST. DIBRUGARH
ASSAM
PIN 786614
44:AFTAB ALI AHSAN
S/O JHAFIZ UDDIN AHMED
VILL. LALIPATHAR
P.O. BECHAMARI
P.S. DHING
DIST. NAGAON
PIN 782123
ASSAM.
45:MASHUDA KHATUN
C/O IKRAM HUSSAIN AHMED
VILL. SALMARABORI
P.O. BECHAMARI
DIST. NAGAON
ASSAM
PIN 782123
46:INAMUL HOQUE CHOWDHURY
C/O UMAR ALI CHOWDHURY
VILL. SALMARABORI
P.O. BECHAMARI
DIST. NAGAON
ASSAM
PIN 782123
47:IKRAM HUSSAIN AHMED
C/O ABDUL HAKIM
VILL. SALMARABORI
P.O. BECHAMARI
DIST. NAGAON
ASSAM
PIN 782123
Page No.# 9/13
48:PRANAMI BORA
C/O GONESH CH. BORA
VILL. CHORACHOWA GAON
P.O. PANICHAKUA
DIST. JORHAT
PIN 785006
49:DIPA RANI DOLEY
D/O RADHA KANTA DOLEY
VILL. DELHOUSI
P.O. GOHPUR
DIST. BISWANATH
PIN 78468
ASSAM.
50:PINKI CHAKRABORTY
C/O RATAN LAL CHAKABROTY
VILL. WARD NO VIII
P.O. LAKSHMISAHAR
DIST. HAILAKANDI
PIN 78152
51:THE STATE OF ASSAM
REPRESENTED BY THE COMMISSIONER AND SECY. TO THE GOVT. OF
ASSAM
EDUCATION ELEMENTARY DEPTT.
DISPUR
GUWAHATI 781006
52:THE DIRECTOR
ELEMENTARY EDUCATION
ASSAM
KAHILIPARA
GUWAHATI 781019
53:THE UNION OF INDIA
REPRESENTED BY THE JOINT SECY. TO THE GOVT. OF INDIA
DEPTT. OF SCHOOL EDUCATION AND LITERACY
MINISTRY OF HUMAN RESOURCES DEVELOPMENT
SHASRI BHAWAN NEW DELHI 110001
54:THE NATIONAL COUNCIL OF TEACHER EDUCATION
A STATUTORY BOADY OF GOVT. OF INDIA
Page No.# 10/13
HAVING ITS OFFICE AT HANZ BHAWAN WING II BAHAHDUR SHAH
ZAFARMARG NEW DELHI 11000
Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. S K GHOSH
Advocate for the Respondent : SC, ELEM. EDU
BEFORE
HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SUMAN SHYAM
HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE MALASRI NANDI
ORDER
14.06.2022
(Suman Shyam, J)
Heard Mr. S. Dutta, learned senior counsel assisted by Mr. S. K. Ghosh,
learned counsel appearing for the review petitioner. Also heard Mr. P. S.
Bhattacharjee, learned Central Govt. Counsel appearing for the Union of India
and Mr. U. Sarma, learned Standing Counsel, Secondary Education
Department, Assam, appearing for the department.
This review petition is directed against the judgment and order dated
03.02.2021 passed by a Division Bench of this Court in Writ Appeal No.24/2021
addressing the core issue raised by a number of Central TET qualified
candidates who were aggrieved by the decision of the State Government to
exclude them from the purview of the selection process on the ground that
none of them had qualified in the State TET examination. The learned Single
Judge had earlier rejected the prayer of the Central TET qualified candidates
and held that in terms of the advertisement notice, in the absence of State TET
qualification, they would not be entitled to be selected/appointed as teachers
in the Lower Primary and Upper Primary schools. There were altogether 3941
vacancies advertised by the department and 916 writ petitioners, who did not
Page No.# 11/13
meet the requirement of State TET qualification, had approached this Court by
filing writ petitions inter-alia contending that they did not get the opportunity to
appear in the State TET examination and therefore, their candidature for
appointment as teachers in the LP/UP schools should be considered on the
basis of their Central TET qualification. Taking note of the facts and
circumstances of the case as well as the arguments advanced at the bar, the
Division Bench of this Court had made the following observations and directions
in the judgment dated 03.02.2021 which are reproduced herein below :-
"53. There can be no doubt about the fact that the ultimate beneficiary
of this recruitment process would be the large number of children who
may suffer if there is undue delay in appointment of teachers. We are
also conscious of the fact that there are 3941 vacancies advertised by
the department and the total number of writ petitioners who had
approached this court is 916. We make it very clear that all these 916
candidates shall be considered against the existing 3941 vacancies. But
even if their candidature is ultimately accepted, all the writ petitioners
including the present appellants can at best fill up 916 vacancies and no
further. Although, there are only 50 appellants before us who have
assailed the impugned judgement and order dated 18.12.2020 passed
by the learned Single Judge, yet, since the impugned judgement has
been set aside and in order to avoid future litigations on the same issue,
we deem it appropriate to grant similar relief to the appellants as the
other writ petitioners who are not before us but are similarly situated.
54. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case in its entirety
and balancing the equities, we direct that the recruitment process
initiated by the department on the basis of advertisement dated
11.09.2020 be now processed in two phases. In the first phase,
appointment orders for filling up 3025 out of 3941 vacancies may be
issued from amongst State TET qualified candidates. The appointment
orders in respect of the remaining 916 vacancies be issued to the eligible
Page No.# 12/13
candidates in the second phase after considering the candidatures of
the 916 writ petitioners which includes the present appellants, who are
Central TET qualified candidates. It is, however, made clear that the
appointment of the writ petitioners/appellants would be subject to the
condition that appellants have the State TET qualification and other
guidelines prescribed by NCTE and they fulfill all eligibility norms
prescribed by the advertisement notice dated 11.09.2020, including
necessary proficiency in the required language."
Mr. S. Dutta, learned senior counsel appearing for the review petitioner
submits that since the Court has given the benefit to the 916 candidates who
are also Central TET qualified persons, hence, similarly situated candidates such
as the review petitioner should also be directed to be considered by the
authorities for appointment, as otherwise, it would amount to discrimination
against similarly situated candidates and therefore, be in violation of the
principle of equality enshrined under Article 14 of the Constitution of India.
According to Mr. Dutta, the judgment and order under review deserves suitable
modification/correction by clarifying that the relief granted by this Court should
not only be confined to the writ appellants and writ petitioners who had
approached the Court but should also include all other similarly situated Central
TET qualified candidates such as the review petitioner. In support of his above
argument, Mr. Dutta has relied upon a decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court
rendered in the case of Lt. Governor of Delhi vs. Dharampal reported in (1990) 4
SCC 13 to contend that similarly situated persons cannot be denied similar
benefit under the law.
The learned departmental counsel has opposed the prayer made in the
review petition and submits that the judgment dated 03.02.2021 has already
Page No.# 13/13
been implemented in its present form.
Upon a careful reading of the judgment dated 03.02.2021 we find that
the order of the Court was meant to be confined only to those Central TET
qualified candidates who had approached this Court by filing writ petitions/writ
appeals. As such, accepting the argument of Mr. Dutta at this stage, would not
only lead to expanding the scope of the order dated 03.02.2021 but would also
alter the basis of the judgment dated 03.02.2021. Therefore, in our considered
opinion, granting relief to the review petitioner in this petition, in exercise of
review jurisdiction would not be permissible in the eye of law. Moreover, we do
not find any sufficient cause to review/recall the order dated 03.02.2021. It also
appears from the submission of the learned departmental counsel that the
judgment dated 03.02.2021 has already been implemented by the State.
Therefore, without commenting on the merit of the plea raised by the
review petitioner, we hold that the prayer of the petitioner cannot be
entertained in this review petition. The review petitioner would be at liberty to
avail appropriate legal remedy.
Review Petition stands closed.
JUDGE JUDGE
Comparing Assistant
