Cremin Dkhar vs State Of Meghalaya & Ors

The brief facts of the case is that the petitioner is HSLC passed and was appointed as L.P. School teacher on a regular basis in a sanctioned post with effect from 01.07.1992, on the approval being obtained from the Deputy Inspector of Schools at Pyndenglangsniang Presbyterian Primary School, Mairang, West Khasi Hills.

The pleaded case of the petitioner is that after the enactment of the Meghalaya (Taking Over of the DCLP Schools) Act, 1993, the petitioner became eligible to be treated as a Government L.P. School teacher and as such, should be covered by the said Act, notwithstanding the fact that the cut-off date was 29.02.1984. As such, the petitioner is before this Court with a prayer that the direction be issued to treat the petitioner as a Government L.P. School teacher and his name be included in the order issued vide Memo No. DSEL/EL/GA/APPT/51/2010/312 dated Shillong the 10.04.2012.

Heard learned counsels for the parties.

Mr. S.M. Suna, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner submits that the petitioner having been appointed since the year 1992 as stated in the petition, is eligible for consideration and entitled to be given the status of Government L.P. School teacher. The learned counsel also places reliance on the judgment rendered by this Court in the case of Ferisha Phalley v. State of Meghalaya & Ors. in WP(C) No. 32 (SH) of 2002 to support his case. He further submits that in this regard, two representations have been filed on 19.06.2015 and 28.10.2016, however the same has not been answered by the respondents. As such, he prays that in the alternative, the respondents may be directed to actively consider the representations so submitted by the writ petitioner for consideration of his case.

Mr. K.P. Bhattacharjee, learned GA appearing on behalf of the respondent No. 1-5 firstly submits that the fact that the petitioner was initially appointed by the State respondents is disputed and maintains that the appointment has been done by the Managing Committee, which was subsequently approved by the State. He further submits that there is no order, notification or direction issued by the Government of Meghalaya, whereby a teacher of Non-Government L.P. School or Minority Private School is to be recognized and treated by a Government L.P. School. As such, he submits that there being no case made out for issuance of any mandamus by this Court, the writ petition is devoid of merit and should be dismissed.

I have considered the submissions of the learned counsels for the parties and also examined the materials on record. The only point that deserves consideration is whether the petitioner is a duly appointed Government teacher serving at Pyndenglangsniang Presbyterian, Lower Primary Deficit School or whether the petitioner has been appointed by the Managing Committee itself with approval from the respondent authorities.

From the service book, it is reflected that the appointment of the petitioner is by the Managing Committee and approval accorded by the Deputy Inspector of Schools. However, in the interest of justice, I propose to dispose the instant writ petition with a direction that the respondents examine the representations filed by the petitioner and to consider the same. At this juncture, learned counsel for the petitioner prays that he may be permitted to file a fresh representation, which is accordingly allowed.

As such, this writ petition is disposed of with a direction that the respondents consider the representation, which will be freshly filed by the petitioner within 15(fifteen) days from today, and the respondent to take a decision thereon within a period of 3(three) months thereafter.

With the following directions, the writ petition is accordingly disposed of.