In-charge Head Master Appointment Denied Due to Pending Departmental Proceedings Against Teacher
In a significant judgment, the Gauhati High Court has ruled that Madhab Chandra Kalita, a senior teacher at Gotanagar High School, cannot be appointed as the In-charge Head Master due to pending departmental proceedings against him. The division bench, comprising Justices Michael Zothankhuma and Kaushik Goswami, emphasized that an individual undergoing disciplinary action cannot claim a promotional post, even on an ad-hoc basis.
The case arose after the previous Head Master retired, leaving a vacancy for which Kalita, the senior-most Assistant Teacher, was considered. However, complications emerged when it was discovered that Kalita had obtained a B.Ed degree in 2016 without prior permission from the appointing authority, in violation of Rule 13 of the Assam Services (Conduct) Rules, 1965. This prompted the authorities to appoint another candidate as the In-charge Head Master, leading Kalita to file a writ petition.
The High Court highlighted that executive instructions, such as Office Memorandums, cannot override statutory rules. The court noted that while the Office Memorandum allowed teachers to pursue a B.Ed degree with prior intimation, it did not relax the requirement for prior permission from the appointing authority. Consequently, Kalita's degree, although valid, constituted a misconduct due to the lack of prior permission.
The court referred to several precedents, including the Supreme Court's decisions in similar cases, underscoring that misconduct related to obtaining a degree without permission should be addressed through disciplinary proceedings, not by invalidating the degree.
The judgment concluded that Kalita, facing an ongoing departmental inquiry, cannot be promoted to the position of In-charge Head Master. The court stressed that allowing a person with pending charges to hold such a post could prejudice the inquiry process. As a result, the court overturned the earlier decision that had favored Kalita, thereby upholding the principles of administrative propriety and adherence to statutory rules.
Bottom Line:
Appointment to the post of In-charge Head Master cannot be claimed as a matter of right by an individual undergoing a departmental proceeding for misconduct.
Statutory provision(s): Assam Services (Conduct) Rules, 1965, Rule 13, Assam Services (Discipline and Appeal) Rules, 1964.
State of Assam v. Madhab Chandra Kalita, (Gauhati)(DB) : Law Finder Doc id # 2849269
