Chapor-Balajan High School vs State Of Assam And 4 Ors

Heard Mr. R. Islam, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. S.P. Bhattacharjee, learned standing counsel for the Elementary Education

Department and Mr. F.U. Barbhuiyan, learned counsel appearing for the respondent Nos. 4 and 5.

The petitioner Chapor Balajan High School being represented by its Headmater has preferred this writ petition against the order dated 29.04.2015

of the Inspector of School, Dhubri. The internal management of the school is in conflict with each other over a period of time resulting in its non-

functioning. The dispute between different persons claiming in the management of the school and also claiming to be employees of the school cannot

stand in the way resulting in the suffering of the students as because the school is closed.

In the aforesaid background, the order dated 29.04.2015 was passed by the Inspector of Schools. The said order requires the constitution of the

managing committee of the school afresh through public, guardians, donors and staff meeting as per the management Rules of Assam Aided Higher

Secondary School, High Schools & Middle Schools, 1976. The said order further requires that the respondent No.4 be allowed to continue to function

as an Assistant Teacher of the school and the respondent No.5 as the LDA of the school.

According to Mr. R. Islam, learned counsel for the petitioner, the Inspector of School did not have the jurisdiction to pass the said order inasmuch

as, the school is a venture school. The second submission of Mr. Islam is that the respondent Nos. 4 and 5 were not in the service of the school as per

the claim of the Headmaster and therefore, the order of the Inspector allowing them to continue as such, is not sustainable.

On the other hand, Mr. F.U. Barbhuiyan, learned counsel for the respondent Nos. 4 and 5 submits that the said order was passed inasmuch as, the

respondent Nos. 4 and 5 were in service of the school having been duly appointed but the management of the school, intends to bring their own

individual candidate in their place.

Both the stand of the learned counsel of the petitioner as well as the respondent Nos. 4 and 5 cannot be decided by this Court in exercise of its

jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, in view of the decision of the Full Bench dated 19.03.2015 in WP(C) No.4612/2011 & Ors.

It is stated that as required by the Full Bench decision, the Educational Tribunal in the Dhubri district has also been constituted.

In view of the above, this Court is of the view that the appropriate remedy for the petitioner would be to approach the Educational Tribunal in

Dhubri district in order to have a determination on the rival submissions as made in this writ petition. However as there is already an interim order

dated 17.06.2015 , it is provided that the interim order shall continue to be in operation for another two months from today.

It is expected that during the period of two months, the petitioner or the respondent whosoever desire may prefer their application before the

Educational Tribunal, Dhubri and upon the said being filed, the Educational Tribunal, Dhubri shall pass its own judicial order as to whether the interim

order is required to be continued or not. In the event no such application is filed before the Education Tribunal, the continuance of the interim order

dated 17.06.2015 would cease to have its effect after 15.07.2018. The aforesaid exercise shall be complete within a period of two months from the

date of receipt of the certified copy of the order. Writ petition is accordingly disposed of.