AYNUL HOQUE v. THE STATE OF MEGHALAYA AND 3 ORS.
Court: High Court of Meghalaya
Bench: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE I. P. MUKERJI, CHIEF JUSTICE,HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE W. DIENGDOH
Judgment date:
Case summary
High Court of Meghalaya judgment dated 2024-11-06. AYNUL HOQUE v. THE STATE OF MEGHALAYA AND 3 ORS. Read the judgment and case details on LawSphereX.
Judgment text
Serial No. 01 Supplementary List HIGH COURT OF MEGHALAYA AT SHILLONG MC (WA) No. 50/2024 Date of Order: 06. 11. 2024 Aynul Hoque ..... Applicant Vs. 1. The State of Meghalaya, represented by the Chief Secretary, Government of Meghalaya. 2. The Commissioner & Secretary, Education Department, Government of Meghalaya. 3. The Director of School Education & Literacy, Shillong. 4. The Director of Elementary & Mass Education, Shillong. ..... Respondents Coram: Hon’ble Mr. Justice I. P. Mukerji, Chief Justice Hon’ble Mr. Justice W. Diengdoh, Judge Appearance: For the Applicant : Mr. S. K. Hassan, Adv with Ms. M. Rahman, Adv For the Respondents : Mr. A. Kumar, Advocate General with Mr. N. Syngkon, GA Ms. A. Thungwa, GA JUDGMENT: (per the Hon’ble, the Chief Justice) (Oral) F First of all there is a long delay of about seven years in preferring this application.
Secondly, the special committee appointed by this Court to enquire into the tainted appointment of school teachers had the jurisdiction to make an enquiry with regard to the recruitment process for appointment of regular teachers, initiated by the government in 2008. It had no power or jurisdiction to make an enquiry into the legality of appointment of contractual teachers of whom the applicant is one. The enquiry is long over. It may be mentioned now that according to the order passed by this Court appointing the special committee, if the committee found an appointee to be unblemished or untainted, he could be appointed regularly. The posts of school teacher, as submitted by the learned Advocate General which became vacant after cancellation of the irregular appointment process, have been filled up. Hence, there is no post of school teachers now to be filled up.
However, since the appointment of both contractual and regular teachers were questioned and declared to be tainted, for any future appointment, the applicant has some right to claim to seek a declaration that his appointment as a contractual teacher was regularly made. In that view of the matter, we do not allow the prayers made in this application but we direct that the special committee constituted by this Court will look into the appointment of the applicant and make a decision within two months of communication of this order as to the legality of his appointment as a contractual teacher in 2011. The applicant shall be free to take part in any future recruitment process if found eligible and be considered accordingly. This application is disposed of. (W. Diengdoh) (I. P. Mukerji) Judge Chief Justice Signature Not Verified Digitally signed by LAMPHRANG KHARCHANDY Date: 2024. 11. 06 18:57:47 IST
Source: High Court of Meghalaya. Dataset: Dattam Labs. CC BY 4.0. Text extracted automatically; compare with the source PDF for layout and accuracy.