Illegal Teacher Appointment: Supreme Court Dismisses Salary Claim in Assam Education Case

The Supreme Court of India recently decided on a case involving an alleged illegal appointment of a teacher in Assam and her claim for unpaid salary. The case, Smt. Dulu Deka v. State of Assam & Others, revolved around a claim by the appellant, who argued that she was appointed as an Assistant Teacher but had not received her salary for years. The Court upheld the Assam government’s decision to nullify her appointment, ruling that she was appointed against non-existent posts and had no legal claim for wages.

Background of the Case

The appellant, Smt. Dulu Deka, claimed she was appointed as an Assistant Teacher at Bengabari M.E. School in Assam. However, she was never paid her salary and filed a writ petition in the Gauhati High Court in 2008, demanding payment from March 12, 2001, onwards. The petition was dismissed by the Single Judge and later by the Division Bench.

The key events in the case timeline are:

December 28, 1996: The Assam government issued an advertisement to fill 7,500 Assistant Teacher posts in M.E./M.V. schools.
July 1997: The appellant claimed to have appeared for an interview.
March 12, 2001: The Selection Committee for Udalguri Sub-Division recommended her appointment.
March 12, 2001: She was appointed by the District Elementary Education Officer, Darrang, on a fixed salary of ₹2,000 per month under the Operation Black Board Scheme, valid until March 31, 2002.
October 18, 2001: The Director of Elementary Education, Assam, declared 509 such appointments illegal, including the appellant’s.
2008: The appellant filed a writ petition, which was dismissed.
January 8, 2010: The Division Bench upheld the dismissal.
August 22, 2023: The Supreme Court dismissed the appeal.

Key Legal Issues Considered

The Supreme Court examined the following legal aspects:

Whether the appellant’s appointment was legal.
Whether she had a right to claim salary despite her appointment being declared void ab initio.
Whether the cancellation order of October 18, 2001, should have been challenged earlier.

Arguments by the Appellant

Smt. Dulu Deka contended:

She was duly selected for the position through a formal recruitment process.
Her appointment order was legally issued.
She had been working at the school for years without salary, which amounted to forced labor (Begar), violating the law.

Arguments by the Respondents

The State of Assam argued:

The appellant’s appointment was illegal and part of a group of 509 teachers appointed against non-existent posts.
The cancellation of these appointments was never challenged by the appellant.
She was appointed to a school outside the Udalguri Legislative Assembly Constituency, violating recruitment rules.
No salary could be paid for an illegal appointment.

Supreme Court’s Analysis and Judgment

1. Legality of the Appointment

The Court ruled that the appointment was illegal from the outset:

“The appointment of the appellant was also included therein. It was found that the District Elementary Education Officer had appointed 509 teachers illegally against non-existent posts.”

2. Failure to Challenge the Cancellation

The Court found that the appellant never challenged the October 18, 2001, order that nullified her appointment:

“The appointment of the appellant had been declared illegal and void ab initio, and was cancelled… the appellant could not legally continue in service thereafter, unless that cancellation order was set aside.”

3. Salary Claim Dismissed

The Supreme Court rejected the salary claim:

“No claim for payment of salary could be made for any period. Even otherwise, it is difficult to believe that a person has been working for two decades without any salary.”

Supreme Court’s Final Decision

The Court dismissed the appeal and upheld the Assam government’s decision:

“The appeal is dismissed. There shall be no order as to costs.”

Conclusion

This judgment establishes key legal principles:

Appointments must be legally valid: If an appointment is declared void, the employee has no right to continue in service.
Challenging cancellation orders is crucial: If an appointment is canceled, the affected party must challenge it in time.
Non-existent posts cannot be claimed: Governments cannot be forced to pay salaries for unauthorized appointments.
Salary cannot be claimed for void appointments: Even if someone works, their salary claim will fail if their appointment was illegal.

This ruling sets a precedent for handling cases of unauthorized government appointments and salary claims.

Petitioner Name: Smt. Dulu Deka.
Respondent Name: State of Assam & Others.
Judgment By: Justice Hima Kohli, Justice Rajesh Bindal.
Place Of Incident: Assam.
Judgment Date: 22-08-2023.

Don’t miss out on the full details! Download the complete judgment in PDF format below and gain valuable insights instantly!

Download Judgment: smt.-dulu-deka-vs-state-of-assam-&-oth-supreme-court-of-india-judgment-dated-22-08-2023.pdf

Directly Download Judgment: Directly download this Judgment

See all petitions in Employment Disputes
See all petitions in Judgment by Hima Kohli
See all petitions in Judgment by Rajesh Bindal
See all petitions in dismissed
See all petitions in supreme court of India judgments August 2023
See all petitions in 2023 judgments

See all posts in Service Matters Category
See all allowed petitions in Service Matters Category
See all Dismissed petitions in Service Matters Category
See all partially allowed petitions in Service Matters Category