WP(C) 1185/2009 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR JUSTICE B.K. SHARMA. While in WP(C) No.5212/2009, the petitioner, who is the Respondent No.5 in the o ther writ petition being WP(C) No.1185/2009, the challenge made is the Annexure- G order dated 5.11.2009, by which the seniority of the petitioner has been dete rmined above the Respondent No.5, who is the petitioner in WP(C) No.1185/2009, i n the second writ petition i.e. WP(C) No.1185/2009, the challenge made is the se lection of the petitioner in WP(C) No.5212/2009 for regular appointment as Headm aster of the M.E. School. The controversy involved in both the writ petitions is as to who is the senior-m ost teacher of Roushanpur M.E. School. By the impugned order dated 5.11.2009 (An nexure-G to the writ petition) passed by the Director of Elementary Education, A ssam, it has been held that the petitioner in WP(C) No.1185/2009 is senior to th e petitioner in WP(C) No.5212/2009. As per the said order, the petitioner in WP( C) No.1185/2009 was appointed in the school initially by the Managing Committee in the year 1979. On the other hand, the petitioner in WP(C) No.5212/2009 was so appointed in the year 1982. There is no dispute that at the time of initial ap pointment, both the teachers did not have the requisite qualification, which is said to be Pre-University/Higher Secondary passed. Both of them were H.S.L.C. ex amination passed at the time of their appointments by the Managing Committee of the school. It is on record and an admitted position that the school was provincialized in t he year 1986, to be precise, w.e.f. 1.9.1986 by an order passed on 28.3.1987. In the order of provincialization, the names of both the incumbents along with oth er incumbents appeared. One of the conditions stipulated in the order of provinc ialization was that the incumbents would be required to qualify in Pre-Universi ty examination or its equivalent within 5 years w.e.f. 1.9.1986. While the peti tioner in WP(C) No.1185/2009 i.e. Noor Uddin Ahmed cleared Pre-University examin ation in the year 1987, the petitioner in WP(C) No.5212/2009 could not qualify i n the said examination, but instead, cleared the Normal Training Course certific ate in the year 2003. Nothing has been stated by the State respondents as to whe ther the said qualification fits in to the qualification required for appointmen t as Assistant Teacher in any M.E. school. However, in the affidavit filed by th e State respondents pursuant to query made in the order dated 9.10.2010, it has been stated that the requisite qualification for appointment as M.E. School teac her is Pre-University/Higher Secondary examination passed. If we go by the aforesaid dates of appointment of the two incumbents involved in this proceeding undoubtedly, the petitioner involved in WP(C) No.1185/2009 is s enior to the petitioner in WP(C) No.5212/2009. However, the petitioner in WP(C) No.5212/2009 while admitting the fact of appointment of the said petitioner in 1 979 has contended that there was misrepresentation on the part of the said petit ioner while he was appointed by the Managing Committee of the school in the year 1979. According to him, such misrepresentation was in respect of the projection that his educational qualification was Pre-University passed. Referring to the aforesaid contention, it is the further stand of Sri Abdul Mann an i.e. the petitioner in WP(C) No.5212/2009 that when the authority detected th e aforesaid misrepresentation, reverted the petitioner involved in WP(C) No.1185 /2009 i.e. Noor Uddin Ahmed to the post of Assistant Teacher in the year 1986 (6 .4.1986) and consequently, he was allowed to continue as Assistant Teacher of th e school. It is thus the contention of Sri Abdul Mannan that the date of appoint ment of Sri Noor Uddin Ahmed should be taken to be 6.4.1986 instead of 1979. No where in the records/pleadings, the aforesaid plea of the petitioner i.e. Sri Abdul Mannan involved in WP(C) No.5212/2009 is substantiated. There is nothing to show that Sri Noor Uddin Ahmed was reverted from his former post of Headmaste r to that of Assistant Teacher. Rather, the records have revealed that when the petitioner in WP(C) No.1185/2009 was appointed, he had read up to Pre-Universit y 2nd Year. There was no misrepresentation on his part. This is precisely the re ason as to why in the order of provincialization, the aforesaid condition was st ipulated that the incumbents would require to clear the Pre-University/Higher Se condary Examination within 5 years. While Sri Noor Uddin Ahmed did qualify in t he said examination in the year 1987, the petitioner involved in WP(C) No.5212/2 009 could not fulfil the said condition. However, as noted above, he obtained th e Normal Certificate Training in the year 1993. It is on the aforesaid basis, the Director of Elementary Education, Assam has pa ssed the impugned order dated 5.11.2009 holding the petitioner Noor Uddin Ahmed involved in WP(C) No.1185/2009 to be senior to Sri Abdul Mannan involved in WP(C ) No.5212/2009. I see no reason to interfere with the said order. Accordingly, W P(C) No.5212/2009 stands dismissed. This now leads us to the issue involved in WP(C) No.1185/2009, which is as to wh ether the selection committee has prepared the Select List duly taking note of the aforementioned seniority position of the two petitioners involved in these t wo writ petitions. It has been brought on record that the Gradation List was fur nished even before the aforesaid impugned order dated 5.11.2009 was passed. The Gradation List was prepared in the year 2008 and it was on that basis, the selec tion was made. In view of the aforementioned seniority position of Sri Noor Uddi n Ahmed above Sri Abdul Mannan, the selection committee will have to prepare and /or review the Select List taking into account the fact that Sri Noor Uddin Ahme d is senior to Sri Abdul Mannan. Such review shall be carried out as expeditious ly as possible, but at any rate, not later than 31st July,2011. Another connected issue involved in this writ petition is as to whether in view of the seniority of Sri Noor Uddin Ahmed above Sri Abdul Mannan, he will be enti tled to hold the charge of Headmaster of the M.E. School. After determination of seniority of Sri Noor uddin Ahmed above Sri Abdul Mannan by the aforesaid impug ned order dated 5.11.2009, an order was passed allowing him to hold the charge o f the post of Headmaster. Till the aforesaid review is carried out in terms of t his order, Sri Noor Uddin Ahmed being senior to Sri Abdul Mannan, should be allo wed to hold the charge of Headmaster. Appropriate order in this regard shall be passed forthwith. In the above context, the respondents may refer to the order dated 18.11.2009 is sued pursuant to the impugned order dated 5.11.2009 by the District Elementary E ducation Officer, Cachar allowing Sri Noor Uddin Ahmed to hold the charge of Hea dmaster of Roushanpur M.E. School. Till the aforesaid review exercise is carried out in respect of the preparation of the Select List for regular appointment of Headmaster in respect of the two incumbents involved in this proceeding, the af oresaid order dated 18.11.2009 shall hold the field. To the above extent, the Select List concerning the two incumbents involved in t hese two writ petitions stands interferred with and the selection committee shal l now carry out the review exercise within the aforesaid stipulated date. With the above directions, the writ petitions are disposed of.