Gauhati High Court
Page No.# 1/5 vs The State Of Assam And Ors on 5 March, 2025
Author: Michael Zothankhuma
Bench: Michael Zothankhuma
Page No.# 1/5
GAHC010020432025
2025:GAU-AS:2280
THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT
(HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)
Case No. : I.A.(Civil)/395/2025
GOBIN SARMAH
S/O LATE PREMAL SARMAH R/O NC NEPALI, P.O. GOGAMUKH, PIN-787026,
DIST. DHEMAJI, ASSAM
VERSUS
THE STATE OF ASSAM AND ORS
REPRESENTED BY THE COMMISSIONER AND SECRETARY TO THE
GOVT.OF ASSAM, SECONDARY EDUCATION DEPARTMENT, DISPUR,
ASSAM, PIN-781006
2:THE DIRECTOR OF SECONDARY EDUCATION
ASSAM
KAHILIPARA
GUWAHATI-781019
3:THE INSPECTOR OF SCHOOLS
DHEMAJI DISTRICT CIRCLE
DHEMAJI
DIST. DHEMAJI
ASSAM
PIN- 787057
4:SHRI GOBIN SARMAH
S/OLATE PREMAL SARMAH
R/O NC NEPALI
P.O. GOGAMUKH
PIN-787026
DIST. DHEMAJI
ASSAM
5:BHABANI HAZARIKA
W/O MR. JOY CHANDRA SAIKIA R/O VILL- GOGAMUKH PUB- BALIGAON
Page No.# 2/5
P.S. GOGAMUKH PIN- 787026
DIST. DHEMAJI
ASSA
Advocate for the Petitioner : NEKIBUR ZAMAN CHOUDHURY, MR A R BHUYAN
Advocate for the Respondent : SC, SEC. EDU., MR. K BORUAH
BEFORE
HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MICHAEL ZOTHANKHUMA
ORDER
Date : 05-03-2025
Heard Mr. AR Bhuyan, learned counsel for the applicant, who is the
respondent No. 4 in the writ petition, i.e., WP(C) 6979/2024. Also heard Mr.
K Boruah, learned counsel for the writ petitioner and Mr. U Sharma, learned
counsel for the Secondary Education Department.
2. This interlocutory application has been filed praying for vacation of the
interim order dated 10.01.2025 passed in WP(C) 6979/2024, wherein the
applicant has been directed to hand over the charge of In-charge
Headmaster/Headmistress of Gogamukh Girls' High School, Dhemaji to the writ
petitioner within a period of one week from today. A compliance report was also
to be submitted by the Inspector of Schools, Dhemaji District Circle to this
Court, pursuant to the interim order dated 10.01.2025.
3. The case of the applicant is that the writ petitioner had been allowed to
hold the charge of Headmistress In-charge of the above said School along with
financial powers, vide order dated 24.03.2022 issued by the Director of
Education, Assam. The said order dated 24.03.2022 was put to challenge by the
applicant herein, vide WP(C) 2621/2022. However, WP(C) 2621/2022 was
Page No.# 3/5
dismissed, vide judgment and order dated 29.01.2024. The writ petitioner
herein was impleaded as party respondent No. 4 in WP(C) 2621/2022.
4. Subsequent to the dismissal of WP(C) 2621/2022, vide judgment and order
dated 29.01.2024, the Director of Secondary Education has passed another
order dated 29.02.2024, by which the writ petitioner has been allowed to act as
the Headmistress In-charge of the above said school.
5. As the applicant herein had not handed over the charge of Headmistress of
the said School to the writ petitioner and as the respondent authorities had not
taken any action to ensure that the charge of Headmistress was given to the
writ petitioner, despite the orders of the Director, the writ petitioner has filed the
present writ petition, i.e., WP(C) 6979/2024. This Court, vide the interim order
dated 10.01.2025, directed the applicant herein to hand over the charge of
Headmistress of the said School to the writ petitioner within a week from
10.01.2025. As the interim order dated 10.01.2025 passed in WP(C) 6979/2024
has not been complied with, the writ petitioner has filed Cont.Cas(C) 23/2025
against the applicant, which is still pending.
6. The applicant's counsel submits that the applicant has not handed over the
charge of the Headmistress of the said School to the writ petitioner, in view of
the fact that the dismissal of WP(C) 2621/2022, vide judgment and order dated
29.01.2024, has been put to challenge before the Division Bench of this Court,
vide WA 122/2024. The applicant's counsel submits that though the Division
Bench has not passed any stay order against the judgment and order dated
29.01.2024 passed in WP(C) 2621/2022, the decision of the learned Single
Judge should not be implemented, as the Division Bench is seized of the matter.
Page No.# 4/5
7. Mr. K Boruah, learned counsel for the writ petitioner submits that as the
judgment and order dated 29.01.2024 passed in WP(C) 2621/2022 has not been
stayed by the Hon'ble Division Bench, the said judgment and order would have
to be complied with.
8. Mr. U Sharma, learned counsel for the Secondary Education Department
also reiterates the submission made by Mr. K Boruah, learned counsel for the
writ petitioner.
9. I have heard the learned counsels for the parties.
10. The facts of the case show that the Hon'ble Division Bench has not stayed
the judgment and order dated 29.01.2024 passed in WP(C) 2621/2022 and as
such, the challenge made to the order dated 24.03.2022 having failed, the writ
petitioner was to be given the charge of Headmistress of the said School by the
applicant. The subsequent order dated 24.03.2022 issued by the Director of
Education, Assam giving charge of the post of Headmistress to the writ
petitioner, has also not been stayed and as such, the applicant has to give the
said charge of Headmistress to the writ petitioner.
11. As stated in the foregoing paras, the writ petitioner has filed Cont.Cas(C)
23/2025 on account of the applicant not having complied with the interim order
dated 10.01.2025 passed in WP(C) 6979/2024. In the case Asit Kumar Das
vs. J Panda, Chief Post Master General & Ors. , reported in (2020) 20
SCC 400, the Supreme Court has held that the filing of an appeal does not
result in the assailed order becoming inoperative and unworthy of being
complied with. A contempt proceeding shall always be maintainable unless the
appellate Court finds it fit to stay the operation of the judgment/order of which
Page No.# 5/5
contempt is alleged.
12. In view of the judgment of the Supreme Court in the case of Asit Kumar
Das (supra), and as there has been no stay of the judgment and order dated
29.01.2024 passed in WP(C) 2621/2022, this Court is of the view that the
application for vacation of the interim order is not made out.
13. Accordingly, this Court does not find any ground to allow the interlocutory
application. The same is dismissed.
JUDGE
Comparing Assistant
