WP(C) 2861/2011 BEFORE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE HRISHIKESH ROY The petitioner, who claims to be the senior most teacher of Tetelia High School challenges the order dated 24.1.2007(Annexure -V) of the Inspector of Schools K DC, Guwahati, whereby the respondent No. 4 is posted as the In charg e Headmaster of the School, after retirement of the regular incumbent w.e.f. 30. 4.2011. It is contended by Mr. H. Das that the petitioner has joined in graduate scale o f pay on 12.6.89, whereas the respondent No. 4 joined in the said scale only on 30.12.1993 and accordingly, notwithstanding the B.Ed. degree of the respondent N o. 4, for the incharge arrangement, the petitioner should have been preferred ov er the private respondent. The learned counsel also contends that the Inspector of Schools has no authority to post an In charge Headmaster in a provincialised high school. Mr. A.K. Deka, learned Standing Counsel, however, submits that for posting of re gular headmaster, the Rules prescribes a B. Ed. Degree and that might have been the basis for, preferring the respondent No. 4 over the petitioner. However, the departmental counsel concedes that the competent authority, who can post In-cha rge Headmaster in provincialised school, is not the Inspector of Schools but the Director of Secondary Education(respondent No. 2). Considering the above submissions and the fact that the process of recruitment o f regular teacher is currently on and selection is already over, instead of kee ping this matter pending, I deem it appropriate to direct the Commissioner and S ecretary to the Govt. of Assam, Department of Secondary Education to deal with t he rival claims of the petitioner and the respondent No. 4, for the post of In c harge Headmaster in Tetelia High School. To enable the officer to make the consi deration, the petitioner would file a representation. His representation should thereafter be considered and disposed of on merit, by affording a hearing to bot h the petitioner and the respondent no. 4, Smt. Arpana Goswami. The case is disp osed of accordingly. However, it is made clear that till a final order is passed, the respondent No. 4 shall not be disturbed from functioning as the In charge Headmaster of the sch ool.