[Cites 1, Cited by 0]
Gauhati High Court
Page No.# 1/6 vs The State Of Assam And 6 Ors on 11 March, 2026
Page No.# 1/6
GAHC010159832024
undefined
THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT
(HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)
Case No. : WP(C)/4178/2024
ASRAF ALI LASKAR AND ANR
SON OF LATE TAJAMUL ALI LASKAR,
RESIDENT OF VILLAGE- BORJURAI,
P.O.- BOALIPAR, P.S.- HAILAKANDI,
DISTRICT- HAILAKANDI, ASSAM,
PIN- 788155.
2: RAJAUL KARIM LASKAR
SON OF LATE FORIZ UDDIN LASKAR
RESIDENT OF VILLAGE- BONDUKMARA
P.O.- RATANPUR
P.S.- HAILAKANDI
DISTRICT- HAILAKANDI
ASSAM
PIN- 788155
VERSUS
THE STATE OF ASSAM AND 6 ORS
REPRESENTED BY THE COMMISSIONER AND SECRETARY TO THE
GOVERNMENT OF ASSAM,
EDUCATION (ELEMENTARY) DEPARTMENT,
DISPUR, GUWAHATI- 781006.
2:THE STATE LEVEL SCRUTINY COMMITTEE
REPRESENTED BY THE DIRECTOR OF ELEMENTARY EDUCATION
ASSAM
KAHILIPARA
GUWAHATI- 781019.
Page No.# 2/6
3:THE MISSION DIRECTOR
ASOM SARBA SIKSHA ABHIYAN MISSION
KAHILIPARA
GUWAHATI- 781019.
4:THE DISTRICT SCRUTINY COMMITTEE
REPRESENTED BY THE DISTRICT COMMISSIONER
HAILAKANDI
ASSAM
PIN- 788162.
5:THE DISTRICT ELEMENTARY EDUCATION OFFICER
HAILAKANDI-CUM-DISTRICT MISSION CO-ORDINATOR
ASOM SARBA SIKSHA ABHIYAN MISSION
HAILAKANDI
PIN- 788151.
6:THE DEPUTY INSPECTOR OF SCHOOLS
HAILAKANDI
DISTRICT- HAILAKANDI
ASSAM
PIN- 788151.
7:THE BLOCK ELEMENTARY EDUCATION OFFICER
HAILAKANDI
DISTRICT- HAILAKANDI
ASSAM
PIN- 788151
Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. B U LASKAR, MR. S BANIK
Advocate for the Respondent : SC, ELEM. EDU, SC, SSA,GA, ASSAM
BEFORE
HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH MAZUMDAR
ORDER
11.03.2026
Heard Mr. S. Banik, learned counsel for the petitioners. Also heard Mr. P.
Page No.# 3/6
Nayak, learned Additional Advocate General and Standing Counsel for the SSA
and Mr. B. Talukdar, learned Standing Counsel for the Department of Elementary
Education.
The order dated 06.02.2026 recorded as follows :-
" The allegation in this writ petition is that though the school had
the requisite number of students to be considered for
provincialisation, based on the date uploaded by CRCCS serving
under the SSA, the school was shown to have 28 Nos. of student
and therefore, the provincialisation was rejected by the concerned
authority.
The learned counsel for the petitioner has drawn the
attention of this Court to the Minutes of the Meeting of the DSC in
which it has been reflected that the school namely, Bondukmara
Purbopar VLP School, where the DSC had decided to consider the
enrollment status as per the field reports submitted by the Block
Elementary Education Officer and the District Elementary Education
Officer and not as per the portal.
It appears that the DSC had taken a view that the CRCCs did
not upload the actual enrollment and there are also certain shadow
area where the actual enrolment could not be uploaded due to
unavailability of mobile network.
In the present case, it is seen that it is not a case of
enrollment number being not uploaded but the discrepancies in
enrolment number between the report given by the CRCCs as
uploaded in the website and the enrollment as certified by the
Page No.# 4/6
Block Elementary Education Officer, Hailakandi and the District
Elementary Education Officer, Hailakandi. The reports were
required to have been verified and thereafter either uploaded or
forwarded to the concerned authorities.
The District Elementary Education Officer and the Block
Elementary Education Officer concerned shall file their respective
individual affidavits bringing on record the enrollment that the
school had in 2017, 2018 and 2019 along with the names and the
details of the students who were found present in the school on
the date of inspection by the aforesaid authorities. The CRCCS
concerned, who had uploaded the details in the portal in respect of
the aforesaid years, shall also file an affidavit along with details of
the students of the enrollment of the student, and the students
who were found to be present during his visit. The MD/SSA shall
ensure that the concerned CRCCs is informed about this order. "
The learned Standing Counsel for the Department of Elementary
Education placed before this Court an instruction dated 10.03.2026 issued by
the Office of the District Elementary Education Officer (DEEO), Hailakandi,
wherein reference has been made to the report submitted by the District
Elementary Education Officer, Hailakandi on 30.09.2019 to the Director of
Elementary Education. In the said report, the number of enrolments for the year
2017 was shown as 31, for the year 2018 as 37, and for the year 2019 as 41.
Mr. Nayak, learned Additional Advocate and Standing Counsel for the SSA,
has also endorsed the aforesaid position based on written instructions.
Therefore, this Court is of the considered opinion that the order dated 08
August 2022 issued by the Director of Elementary Education, noting that the
Page No.# 5/6
enrolment of Bondukmara Purbopar V.L.P. School had been shown in the DSC
report as 28 students, is erroneous. In none of the aforesaid years was the
enrolment shown as 28. As per the instructions produced by the learned
Standing Counsel for the Department of Elementary Education, the enrolment in
the year 2018 was 49 and in the year 2019 was 32. Accordingly, the conclusion
of the Director of Elementary Education that the petitioner's school was not
entitled to consideration for provincialization only on the ground that it had
fewer than 30 students is interfered with.
In such circumstances, this Court interferes with the order dated
08.08.2022 issued by the Director of Elementary Education rejecting the case of
the petitioner's institution for provincialization of the services of the employees.
Accordingly, the State Level Scrutiny Committee, represented by the
Director of Elementary Education, is directed to take up the case of Bondukmara
Purbopar V.L.P. School again for consideration of provincialization of the services
of the employees therein, namely, Asraf Ali Laskar, Head Teacher, and Rajaul
Karim Laskar, Assistant Teacher, by considering the number of student
enrolments in the said school to be above and beyond the requirement as
prescribed under the Assam Education (Provincialisation of Services of Teachers
and Re-Organisation of Educational Institutions) Act, 2017.
In case the institution is found to satisfy all other eligibility conditions as
required under the Assam Education (Provincialisation of Services of Teachers
and Re-Organisation of Educational Institutions) Act, 2017, the order
provincializing the services of the eligible employees shall be brought to its
logical conclusion within a period of six weeks from the date of receipt of the
certified copy of this order.
Page No.# 6/6
The writ petition is disposed of.
JUDGE
Comparing Assistant
