WP(C) 565/2010 BEFORE HON’BLE MR JUSTICE AMITAVA ROY Heard Mr AM Mazumdar, learned Senior counsel for the petitioners ,Mr MK Choudhury, learned Senior Standing Counsel, Education Department and Mr G Gosw ami, learned Standing Counsel, Assam Sarba Siksha Abjijan Mission. Ms VL Singh, leaned State counsel is also heard. The petitioners, various Education Guarantee Scheme ( for short, hereaft er referred to as the ’EGS’) centers as well as the teachers thereof nomenclatur ed as ’Siksha Mitras’ are before this Court being aggrieved by the Notification No.PMA.174/2009/53 dated 31.12.2009 thereby upgrading 1521 such EGS centers to the status of Lower Primary Schools to their exclusion. In substance, according to them, this has been done by overlooking the criteria of seniority construed on the basis of the dates of the establishment of the EGS centers as well as o n extraneous consideration. Annulment of the impugned notification on this groun d has been sought for. The State respondents in their affidavit affirmed by the Commissioner & Secretary to the Govt. of Assam, Education(Elementary & Secondary) Department f iled in WP( C) No.388/2010 in paragraph 9 have stated thus :- That with regard to the statements made in paragraph 7 of the writ petition, t he deponent states that there is no guideline or principle that seniority of ope ning of the EGS centers are to be taken as the basis for their upgradation as L .P. Schools as mentioned by the petitioners. The deponent in this context states that upgradation of 1521 centers has been done as first phase exercise and Government will upgrade the remaining EG S centers(functioning within the norms) phase-wise in the next few yeas on the b asis of other criteria as may be relevant in the interest of Elementary Educati on. Moreover, the petitioners EGS centers are not likely tobe affected. The learned Senior counsel in view of the stand taken by the State respo ndents in the extracted portion of the affidavit submits that these petitions m ay therefore be closed with a direction to the concerned departmental authori ties to expedite the process of upgradation of the petitioners’ centers. It is noticeable from the affidavit and the documents appended thereto that in all 3512 EGS centers have been construed to be functioning inconformity with the prescribed norms and that 1521 EGS centers upgraded by the impugned n otification dated 31.12.2009 are included therein. The averments made in paragr aph 9 in clear terms indicate that the EGS centers of the present petitioners would be in addition to 1521 EGS centers already upgraded but within the abovem entioned 3512 and that the upgradation of their centers is only a matter of ti me. After hearing the learned counsel for the parties and on a consideration of the pleaded averments more particularly the contents of paragraph 9 of the affidavit filed by the State respondents as above, these petitions are disposed of with a direction to the concerned departmental authorities to take necessary steps for upgradation of the petitioners EGS centers as Lower Primary Schools a s expeditiously as possible. No costs.