WP(C) 2458/2009 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE A.C. UPADHYAY Heard Mr. B. Islam, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner as well as Mr. M.K. Mishra, learned Standing Counsel, Education Department appearing on behalf of respondent Nos.1 to 4. Facts, leading to the filing of this writ petition, may be stated in brief, as f ollows: This writ petition has been filed by the petitioner for regularisation of his se rvice as a teacher of Birjhora Tea Estate L.P. School, Bongaigaon. The petitioner was temporarily appointed by the President of Managing Committee, Birjhora Tea Estate L.P. School, Bongaigaon in the post of Second Hindi Teacher of the school on honorary basis with effect from 17.06.1991. Subsequently, the service of the petitioner as the teacher of the school was extended from time to time. The petitioner was also appointed in the leave vacancy, which arose in th e school. The school was established in the year 1952 and it was provincialised on 19.11.1991. It is submitted on behalf of the petitioner that the petitioner as second founde r teacher in the school, has been working from 17.06.1991 till date. However, th e service of the petitioner was not regularized as a teacher in the school at th e time of provincialisation of the school. Accordingly, the petitioner’s name wa s dropped from the list of teachers of the schools, who were regularized at the time of provincialisation of the school. Mr. M.K. Mishra, learned Standing Counsel, Education Department referring to the provisions of the Rule 5(3) of the Assam Elementary Education (Provincialisatio n) Rules, 1977 has pointed out that the teachers working in venture school may b e retained at the time of taking over and provincialisation of the school if the y possess the minimum qualification and age for recruitment provided further tha t such teachers ought to have put in at least two years continuous service immed iately preceding the taking over of the school. However, apparently, the petitioner, who was appointed in the year 1991 did not have required qualification of working tenure of two years preceding the taking over of the school, for regularisation as teacher in terms of the provision of R ule 5(3) of the Rules aforesaid. No rule or law has been shown or placed before this Court by the petitioner, which entitled him to claim regularisation of his service. Therefore, the petitioner having not fulfilled the requisite qualifica tion for regularisation, as a teacher serving in the school cannot be legally be entitled to any relief whatsoever as prayed for. However, it is up to the Govt. to take a policy decision to consider the case of the petitioner keeping in view his length of service as a teacher in the school . In view of the above, the prayer made by the petitioner for regularization of hi s service is not allowed. Accordingly, the writ petition is dismissed.