IN THE SUPREME COURT OF BANGLADESH
(HIGH COURT DIVISION)
Writ Petition No. 552 of 2017
Judgment On: 08.10.2020
Hon'ble Judges/Coram:
Md. Khasruzzaman and Md. Mahmud Hassan Talukder, JJ.
Counsels:
For Appellant/Petitioner/Plaintiff: Md. Iqbal Hossain and Md. Nizamul Islam, Advocates
For Respondents/Defendant: Md. Shaharia Kabir, Advocate
Subject: Employment Laws
Relevant Section:
Primary SCHOOLS (TAKING OVER) act, 1974 - Section 3; CONSTITUTION OF THE PEOPLE'S REPUBLIC OF BANGLADESH - Article 102
Acts/Rules/Orders:
Constitution Of The People's Republic Of Bangladesh - Article 102, Constitution Of The People's Republic Of Bangladesh - Article 27, Constitution Of The People's Republic Of Bangladesh - Article 29, Constitution Of The People's Republic Of Bangladesh - Article 29(1), Constitution Of The People's Republic Of Bangladesh - Article 31; Primary Schools (taking Over) act, 1974 - Section 3, Primary Schools (taking Over) act, 1974 - Section 3(1), Primary Schools (taking Over) act, 1974 - Section 4(1)
Citing Reference:
Disposition:
Rule Made Absolute
Industry: Education
JUDGMENT
Md. Mahmud Hassan Talukder, J.
1. On an application under article 102 of the Constitution of the People's Republic of Bangladesh, Rule Nisi was issued calling upon the respondents to show cause why the respondents should not be directed to appoint the petitioner as Assistant Teacher of Balakhal Government Primary School, Upazilla-Brahmanpara, District-Comilla through Gazette and why the impugned Office Order through Gazette vide Memo No. 38.007.015.000.15.00.2013-407 dated 01.12.206 passed by the respondent No. 2, Deputy Secretary, Ministry of Primary and Mass Education violating the seniority serial appointed the respondent No. 9 as Assistant Teacher of Balakhal Government Primary School, Upazila-Brahmanpara, District-Comilla by depriving the petitioner from service(Annexure-J) should not be declared to have been made without lawful authority and of no legal effect and/ or such other or further order or orders passed as to this Court may seem fit and proper,
2. Facts, leading to issuance of Rule Nisi, in short, are:
That the petitioner attended in both the written and viva voce examinations taken by the Managing Committee as well as Appointment Committee in respect of appointment of Assistant Teachers of Balakhal Non-Government Primary School, Brahmanpara, Comilla and stood first in both the examinations and as such, the said committee, by a resolution taken in a meeting held on 09.03.2000 (Annexure-A to the writ petition), decided to issue appointment letter on 11.03.2000 in favour of the petitioner in the post of Assistant Teacher of the said school. Accordingly, the respondent No. 8, President of the managing committee of the school issued appointment letter dated 11.03.2000 (Annexure- A-1 to the writ petition) in favour of the petitioner requesting her to join in the post of Assistant Teacher of the said school within 22.03.2000 and accordingly, the petitioner joined the said school on 22.03.2000 as Assistant Teacher(Annexure-A-2 to the writ petition) and since then she had been serving as such with full satisfaction of the authority.
3. It is stated that pursuant to Memo No. Pra.Ga.Shi/Prosha-3/5R-1/93/248 dated 05.11.1996 issued by the Divisional Office, Primary and Mass Education Division, Chittagong on the basis of an application for registration, the respondent Nos. 4 and 7 jointly inspected the Balakhal Non-Government Primary School and eventually they submitted their joint inspection report in the prescribed form on 27.01.2010 (Annexure-B to the writ petition) with a recommendation for giving permanent registration in favour of the said school. Thereafter, on 22.08.2020 and 07.12.2010 the respondent No. 7 again inspected the said school and submitted his inspection reports (Annexures-B-1 and B-2 respectively to the writ petition). The respondent No. 7 in its inspection report also recommended that the aforesaid school needs 05 (five) teachers/mistresses as it has about five hundred students and also recommended to pay the bills to the 05 (five) teachers/mistresses. However, on the basis of the aforesaid joint inspection reports, the said school has been registered in the year of 2010 in the category of 'Non-Government Registered Primary School' along with other schools. Thereafter, the Deputy Director (Chittagong Division), Compulsory Primary Education Implementation Examination Unit, Primary and Mass Education Ministry, Education Bhaban, Dhaka, issued Memo No. 38.227.001.07. 01.000.2011.785 dated 12.05.2011 (Annexure-C to the writ petition) to the respondent No. 4 requesting him to send report in the prescribed inspection Form after thorough inspection in respect of all teachers/ mistresses of Balakhal Registered Non Government Primary School and then the respondent No. 2 issued Memo No. 38. 007. 015. 000. 03. 00. 2013-597 dated 26.12.2013(Annexure-C-l to the writ petition) to respondent No. 3 requesting him to send a list of the teachers/mistresses who are waiting for Monthly Pay Order (MPO) with necessary papers within 02.01.2014, on the basis of which, the respondent No. 7 prepared and sent the list as to information of teachers/mistresses on 03.03.2013 and list of information about the school (Acquisitioned in 2nd step) dated 10.12.2014 (Annexures-C-2 and C-3 respectively to the writ petition) providing the name of the school and its teachers/ mistresses chronologically with their seniority according to the date of joining and academic qualifications wherein the name of the writ petitioner has been shown in serial No. 2 and date of joining has been shown as on 22.03.2000. The Primary and Mass Education Directorate, Dhaka published the personal data of all teachers including the writ petitioner in their website showing her date of joining as on 22.03.2000. (Annexure-D to the writ petition).
4. It is stated that Ministry of Primary and Mass Education, Biddyalaya-1, Odhishakha, issued a Notification under Memo No, 28.007,015.000.04. 00.2013.424 dated 06,10.2013 (Annexure-E to the writ petition) under section 3(1) of the Primary Schools (Taking Over) act, 1974 in respect of nationalization of the Non-Government Primary Schools including the petitioner's school, Community Primary Schools and the Schools established by the NGO run with the financial help of the Government. That the respondent No. 9 Most, Habiba Akhter, made an representation (Annexure-F to the writ petition) before the Hon'ble Minister, Ministry of Primary and Mass Education demanding inquiry as to false date of joining of Most. Selina Akhter, Assistant Teacher of Balakhal Government Primary School on the ground stating inter alia that the date of joining of the said Selina Akhter has been shown in the inspection report of respondent No. 4 as 13.11.2001 but in fact she had joined the school after 11.10.2003. The Local Member of Parliament also issued letter dated 10.02.2015 (Annexure-F-1 to the writ petition) to the Hon'ble Minister, Primary and Mass Education, regarding inclusion of two teachers including Most. Habiba in the final Gazette and accordingly, the Hon'ble Minister directed the Additional Secretary, Ministry of Primary and Mass Education for consideration of the same. The respondent No. 5, pursuant to Memo dated 29.6.2015 issued by the respondent No. 4, formed Three Member Inquiry Committee and ultimately, on 19.10.2015, the committee submitted the information of the teachers/mistresses of Balakhal Government Primary School by changing the date of joining of the writ petitioner as on 12.01.2005 instead of the actual date of joining on 22.03.2000. (Annexures- G-2 and G-3 respectively to the writ petition). Thereafter, the respondent No. 2 issued notice dated 31.7.2016 (Annexure-H-1 to the writ petition) directing the respondent No. 9 to appear for personal hearing at the Office Room of Joint Secretary (Biddyalaya) at 3.P.M. on 4.8.2016 with all relevant papers regarding the complaint of nationalization of the Assistant Teacher in the said school and they appeared in the said meeting. Subsequently, on 20.08.2016, the respondent No. 8 filed an application (Annexure-I to the writ petition) before the Hon'ble Minister, Ministry of Primary and Mass Education stating inter alia that at one stage of the meeting he felt ill and as such he being instigated by the respondent No. 9 inadvertently mentioned the writ petitioner's date of joining as on 16.1.2005 instead of her actual date of joining on 22.3.2000 and thereby prayed for correction of the same, and that the writ petitioner also on 06.10.2016 made another similar application (Annexure-I-1 to the writ petition) to the Hon'ble Minister who then directed the Additional Secretary (Biddyalaya) to consider the same but they did not do anything on the same. Ultimately, the respondent No. 2 issued Office Order under Memo No. 38.007.015. 000.15.00.2013-407 dated 01.12.2016 (Annexure-J to the writ petition) upon violating the seniority serial appointed the respondent No. 9 as Assistant Teacher of Balakahal Government Primary School, Upazila-Bhahmanpara, District-Comilla, by excluding the name of the writ petitioner as Assistant Teacher of the said school.
5. Under such circumstances, the writ petitioner moved this Court under article 102 of the Constitution in the above-noted writ petition challenging the aforesaid office order (Annexure-J to the writ petition) and obtained Rule Nisi and also obtained direction upon the respondent Nos. 1 to 8 not to fill up 01 (one) post of Assistant Teacher of Balakhal Government Primary School, Upazilla- Brahmanpara, District-Comilla.
6. Respondent No. 9, Most Habiba Akhter, contested the Rule Nisi by filing affidavit-in-opposition upon denying all the material allegations made against her, stating, inter alia that there is no contradiction between the respondent No. 9 and the writ petitioner and that the respondent No. 9 has got appointment as an Assistant Teacher of the school in question after following due process of law. It is further stated that in all official records the name of the respondent No. 9 has been included as an Assistant Teacher and she is not the competitor of the writ petitioner. It is also stated that since one post is still vacant in the school in question as such the petitioner may be absorbed in that post.
7. Mr. Md. Iqbal Hossain, the learned Advocate appearing on behalf of the petitioner submits that the petitioner being stood first in the written and viva voce examination has been issued with appointment letter dated 11.02.2000 pursuant to which the writ petitioner joined the said school on 22.03.2000 and since then she has been serving with utmost satisfaction of the authority and that subsequently, on 06.10.2013, the Government by a notification nationalized the recognized Non-Government Primary Schools including the petitioner's school and as such, the petitioner has legitimate expectation that her name will be published in the final gazette as a Government Employee, but the respondent Nos. 2 and 4 to 7 illegally changed the date of joining of the petitioner and then published the names of the Teachers/Mistresses by the Office Order through Gazette notification excluding the name of the petitioner and as such the office order so far as it relates to the Balakhal Government Primary School is liable to be declared to have been passed without lawful authority and of no legal effect. He next submits that articles 27 and 29 of the Constitution provides that all citizens are equal before law and are entitled to get equal protection of law and there shall be equality for all citizens in respect of employment or office in the service of the Republic but the respondents upon violating the fundamental rights of the petitioner as guaranteed by the Constitution published the impugned Office Order by depriving the petitioner from getting service of a teacher which is ultra vires to the Constitution. Accordingly, the learned Advocate for the writ petitioner prays for interference of this Hon'ble Court under article 102 of the Constitution by directing the respondents to appoint the writ petitioner, through publication of the official gazette, in the post of Assistant Teacher with seniority along with all arrear dues from 01.07.2013.
8. Mr. Md. Shaharia Kabir, the learned Advocate appearing on behalf of the respondent No. 9 submits that the respondent No. 9 has got the appointment of a teacher in the said school upon observing due process of law and that her name has been included by the authority in all governmental papers (Annexures C-2, C-3, G-2, G-3 and J to the writ petition and also Annexure- II to the affidavit-in-opposition). He further submits that the respondent No. 9 is not a competitor of the petitioner and there is no contradiction between the petitioner and the respondent No. 9. Finally he submits that since one post is still vacant in the school in question, the petitioner may be appointed as an Assistant Teacher in the said school.
9. Upon hearing the learned Advocates appearing on behalf of their respective parties and on perusing the materials on record it appears that the writ petitioner has challenged the Office Order being No. 38. 007. 015. 000. 15. 00. 2013-407 dated 01.12.2016 (Annexure-J to the writ petition) by which the Government nationalized the service of the teachers of Balakhal Government Primary School with effect from 01.07.2013 along with other schools under the Chittragram Division excluding the name of the writ petitioner as an Assistant Teacher.
10. In the writ petition the writ petitioner claims that she has been appointed as an Assistant Teacher of Balakhal Non Government Primary School by the managing committee of the school on 11.03.2000, upon observing all the required formalities in accordance with law and accordingly, she joined the said school on 22.03.2000(Annexures-A-l and A-2 respectively to the writ petition). It is further claimed by the writ petitioner that in all inspection reports, which were made by the respondent-authorities for the purpose of giving permanent registration to the writ petitioner school, the name of the writ petitioner has been shown in serial No. 2 among the names of the teachers of the writ petitioner's school mentioning the date of joining as on 22.03.2000. But, after the petitioner's school has been nationalized along with other schools through gazette notification dated 06.10.2013(Annexure-E to the writ petition) the respondent No. 9, Most. Habiba Akhter, filed an application before the Hon'ble Minister, Ministry of Primary and Mass Education, making allegation against Most. Selina Akhter about her date of joining the school, stating, inter alia that although her date of joining had been shown as on 13.11.2001 in the inspection report dated 27.01.2010, but actually she joined the school after 11.10.2003 which is the cause of apprehension of the respondent No. 9 in respect of nationalization of the service of the teachers working in the said school. Unfortunately, what happened is that the committee, constituted for the said purpose, prepared and sent the information about the teachers of the said school showing the date of joining of the writ petitioner as on 16.01.2005 instead of 22.03.2000 (Annexure-G-2 to the writ petition), without showing any cause or materials for such changing the date of joining of the writ petitioner. In consequence thereof, in the impugned office order issued by the respondent No. 2 for nationalization of the service of the teachers of the schools including the writ petitioner's school the name of the writ petitioner has been excluded.
11. In this respect, the learned Advocate for the writ petitioner submitted that the changing of the date of joining of the writ petitioner is violative of the principles of natural justice and in consequence of the same, the subsequent action of excluding the name of the petitioner from the list of teachers of the school in question by the impugned office order is violation of the provision of sections 3 of the Primary Schools (Taking Over) act, 1974, section 4(1) of the taking over Non Government Primary School's Teachers (Determination of the Conditions of the Service) Rules, 2013 and also articles 27, 29(1) and 31 of the Constitution and as such, the impugned office order so far it relates to Balakhal Government Primary School is liable to be declared to have been made without lawful authority and of no legal effect and thereby prayed for direction upon the respondent-authority to appoint the writ petitioner as Assistant Teacher of Balakhal Government Primary School with effect from 01.07.2013.
12. For the purpose of determination of the issue involved in this writ petition, it will be profitable if we go through the resolution of the Managing Committee dated 09.03.2000 (Annexure-A to the writ petition) of which relevant portion is quoted below:
13. In view of the above resolution, the authority of the school decided to appoint the writ petitioner namely, Monzuma Akhter as Assistant Teacher of Balakhal Non-Government Primary School, Chandola, Brahmanpara, Comilla, and accordingly, she was issued with appointment letter dated 11.03.2000 requesting her to submit joining letter before the President of the Managing Committee of the school within 22.03.2000 (Annexure-A-1 to the writ petition). From Annexure-A-2 to the writ petition it appears that the writ petitioner joined the school as an Assistant Teacher on 22.03.2000 and on the same date the President of the managing committee accepted her joining letter upon putting his signature with date i.e. on 22.03.2000.
14. From the Inspection Reports dated 27.01.2010 and 04.03.2011 for the purpose of giving permanent registration of a school (Annexures-B and B-1 to the writ petition), it appears that under the heading "as to information of teachers working in the said school", the name of the writ petitioner has been mentioned against serial No. 2 and the date of joining has also been shown as on 22.03.2000. It also appears from the Memo dated 12.5.2011 issued by the Deputy Director (Chittagong Division), Compulsory Primary Education Implementation Unit, Education Bhaban, Dhaka to respondent No. 4 (Annexure-C to the writ petition) asking him to send the detailed of the teachers/ mistresses of Registered Non-Government Primary Schools, who accordingly sent the detailed of all the teachers/mistresses column wise including the writ petitioner's school (Annexure-C-2 to the writ petition) wherein also the writ petitioner's name and date of joining has been mentioned in serial No. 2 and 22.03.2000 respectively. From Annexure-D to the writ petitioner, i.e. a downloaded copy of personal data of the writ petitioner maintained by the Primary Education Directorate in their website it appears that the writ petitioner's date of joining the school has been shown therein as on 22.03.2000.
15. Admittedly, the name of the writ petitioner's school has been nationalized along with other schools vide Notification dated 06.10.2013 (Annexure-E to the writ petition) and that subsequently, the respondent No. 7, Upazilla Education Officer, Brahmanpara, Comilla, sent a list containing the information of schools under the said upazilla, already taken over by the Government in 2nd step by the gazette notification (Annexure-C-3 to the writ petition) wherefrom it appears that the name of the writ petitioner has been shown just after the name of the Headmaster of the said school i.e in serial No. 2.
16. However, respondent No. 9, Most. Habiba Akhter, filed an application (Annexure-F to the writ petition) before the Hon'ble Minister, Ministry of Primary and Mass Education, making allegation against Most. Selina Akhter as to the date of her joining and as such demanded for inquiry and action accordingly. The Local Member of Parliament also issued D.O. Letter to the Hon'ble Minister in this respect. However, the respondent No. 4 formed an inquiry committee pursuant to which the respondent No. 7 issued notice dated 14.10.2015 requesting all the teachers/mistress of the schools to be present with all documents and after inquiry the committee submitted report (Annexure-G-2 to the writ petition) from where this writ petitioner's name has been shown in serial No. 5 and date of joining has been shown as on 16.01.2005. It appears that the President of the managing committee (respondent No. 8) filed an application before the Hon'ble Minister (Annexure-I to the writ petition) for amendment of the date of joining of the writ petitioner stating that in the meeting held on 4.8.2016 at the office room of Joint Secretary, he mistakenly mentioned the date of joining as on 16.01.2005 in place of actual date of 22.03.2000 at the instigation of respondent No. 9. The writ petitioner also on 6.10.2016 filed similar application (Annexure-I-1 to the writ petition) for redress. But the respondents without paying any heed to the same, finally published the Office Order dated 01.12.2016 (Annexure-J to the writ petition) excluding the name of the petitioner from the list of the teacher and violating the seniority serial appointed the respondent No. 9 in the said school. So it is apparent that to dispose of the allegation against Most. Selina Akhter, Assistant Teacher made by respondent No. 9, the respondents willfully and illegally made the writ petitioner a victim of the circumstances by changing the date of joining in order to exclude the name of the petitioner from the list of the teachers of the said school, which according to the learned Advocate for the petitioner, is violative of 3(2)(b) of the Primary School (Taking Over) act, 1974 , Rule 4 of the taking over Non-Government Primary School's Teachers (Determination of the Conditions of the Service) Rules, 2013 and also violative of articles 27, 29(1) and 31 of the Constitution.
17. Under the aforesaid circumstances, finding no other alternative, challenging the impugned office order, the writ petitioner approached this Court under article 102 of the Constitution and obtained Rule Nisi. At the time of issuance of the Rule this Court directed the respondents not to fill up 01 (one) post of Assistant Teacher of Balakhal Government Primary School.
18. The Rule having been served upon the respondents on 08.05.2017 through usual course and by registered post and the Rule has been made ready for hearing. But none of the respondent-authorities appeared in this Rule and filed any affidavit-in-opposition to Controvert the allegations made in the writ petition by the writ petitioner against them. Only respondent No. 9, who is a teacher of the said school, appeared in the Rule Nisi and filed affidavit-in-opposition denying the allegation made against her. However, it is stated by the respondent No. 9 that the writ petitioner may be absorb in the said school in question since one post of Assistant Teacher is still vacant.
19. The settled principle of law is that the writ petition is a summary proceeding which is to be disposed of on affidavit. Statement made in the writ petition is required to be controverted by filing affidavit-in-opposition. If any statement is not controverted by filing affidavit-in-opposition then the Court is to proceed as if such statement made in the writ petition has been admitted by the respondent. Here in this case, none of the respondent-authorities have come forward and filed any affidavit-in-opposition controverting the averments made in the writ petition and as such we are of the view that the statements made in the writ petition and allegations made against the respondent-authorities are deemed to have been admitted by the respondent authority. This view finds support in the case of Naseem Bano Vs. U.P. reported in MANU/SC/0405/1993 : AIR 1993 SC 2592,
20. As we have already found that in the written and viva voce examinations the writ petitioner stood first and the committee decided to issue appointment letter on 22.03.2000 and she would be requested to join the school within 22.03.2000. From the appointment letter and the joining letter it appears that the writ petitioner has been given appointment letter on 11.03.2000 and accordingly she joined the school on 22.03.2000 and accepted the joining letter by the respondent No. 8 on the same day.
21. So, it is crystal clear that the writ petitioner joined the school as Assistant Teacher on 22.03.2000. As we have said that none of the respondent authorities come forward to controvert any statement by filing affidavit-in-opposition along with necessary documents, it is established that the date of joining of the writ petitioner is 22.03.2000.
22. Moreover, in Section 3 of the Primary Schools (Taking Over) act, 1974, under which all the Registered Non Government Primary Schools including the petitioner's school have been nationalized, it has been provided in sub clause (b) of sub section (2) that "all teachers of the Primary school shall become employees of the Government and shall hold their service under the Government on such terms and conditions as the Government may determine."
23. Here in this case, since the writ petitioner is a teacher of Balakhal Registered Non-Government Primary School and since her date of joining all along is 22.03.2000 in all governmental records, she has legitimate expectation that with the nationalization of her school, she will become a teacher of the Government Primary school and shall hold the service of the Government. But the respondent violating the aforesaid provision of law excluded the writ petitioner from the list of the teacher by the office order which is violative of her fundamental right guaranteed under articles 27, 29 and 31 of the Constitution.
24. From the materials on record it appears that the writ petitioner accrued the right of becoming a Government teacher of Balakhal Government Primary School under section 3 of the Primary Schools (Taking Over) act, 1974 by which the said school has been nationalized along with other schools and this right is protected under articles 27 and 29(1) of the Constitution. As such the impugned office order so far it relates to the writ petitioner is violative of Constitution.
25. Furthermore, the respondents changed the date of joining of the writ petitioner without showing any cause and giving an opportunity of being heard. Even the applications of the respondents No. 8 and the writ petitioners in respect of modification of the changed date of joining of the writ petitioner have not been paid any heed by the respondent authority. In changing the date of joining, the respondents failed to adopt the essential principles of natural justice by proceeding against her as submitted by the learned Advocate for the writ petitioner.
26. The principles of natural justice are applied to administrative process to ensure procedural fairness and to free it from arbitrariness. Violation of the same constitutes procedural ultra vires. The basic principle of fair procedure is that before taking any action against a man the authority should give him notice of the case and afford him fair opportunity to answer the case against him and to put his own case. This view finds support in the case of Sk. Ali Ahmed Vs. Secretary, Ministry of Home Affairs, Government of the People's Republic of Bangladesh and others, reported in 40 DLR (AD)170,
27. In the present case as we have already found that on the basis of an allegation made by respondent No. 9 against Most. Selina Akhter, Assistant Teacher, the authority formed committee and ultimately changed the date of joining of the writ petitioner inspite of the fact that the writ petitioner's date of joining is 22.03.2000. Even if the respondent authority did not pay any heed about the applications of the respondent No. 8, President of the Managing Committee and the writ petitioner in respect of modification of the said changed date of joining of the writ petitioner. This action of the respondents is clearly mala fide and discriminatory and as such requires to be struck down being violative of the Constitution. In the administration of law, if the action of a public functionary is found to have been taken in disregard of the policy laid down by the law or it produces a discriminatory effect in violation of any provision of the law the action may be struck down not only as an ultra vires act, but also as an act violative of article 27 of the Constitution. This view finds support in the case of Pannalal Binjraj and others Vs. Union of India and others, reported in MANU/SC/0020/1956 : AIR 1957 SC 397.
28. Under the aforesaid facts and circumstances, as stated hereinabove we are of the view that the writ petitioner is entitled to appoint as an Assistant Teacher of Balakhal Government Primary School along with other teachers of the said school which had been nationalized under section 3 of the Primary Schools (Taking Over) act, 1974 with effect from 01.07.2013 but, the respondents committed illegality in passing the office order by excluding the name of the writ petitioner and as such, the Rule Nisi issued on an application filed by the petitioner under article 102 of the Constitution has substance.
29. Accordingly, the Rule Nisi is made absolute. Hence, impugned Office Order through Gazette vide Memo No. 38.007.015.000.15.00.2013-407 dated 01.12206 passed by the respondent No. 2, Deputy Secretary, Ministry of Primary and Mass Education violating the seniority serial appointed the respondent No. 9 as Assistant Teacher of Balakhal Government Primary School, Upazila-Brahmanpara, District-Comilla by depriving the petitioner from service (Annexure-J to the writ petition) is declared to have been made without lawful authority and of no legal effect.
30. From Annexures-P and P-1 to the supplementary affidavit filed by the writ petitioner it appears that the respondent No. 7 on 04.03.2018 and 23.03.2020 sent lists of the vacant posts of Headmaster/ Assistant Teachers/Mistresses of the schools under Brahmanpara Comilla wherefrom it is clear that still now one post of Assistant Teacher of the said school is remained vacant to be filled up.
31. Accordingly, the respondents are directed to appoint the writ petitioner as Assistant Teacher of Balakhal Government Primary School, Brahmanpara, Comilla, keeping the seniority serial in order, in accordance with law.
There will be no order as to costs.
Communicate tins order at once.
If you have any questions please send us a message and I will get back to you or you can contact us.
