Court Mandates Fresh Inquiry Where UDISE Enrollment Discrepancies Conflict With Field Inspection Reports for Provincialisation

The petitioner, Md. Azizul Hoque, is the Headmaster of Dakhin Kadamoni Pather L.P. School (Venture), established in 1996

The school was allotted DISE code 0102715 for the year 2009-10

A dispute arose when a terminated assistant teacher, Habibur Rahman, allegedly established a "fake" school under the same name and manipulated official records to secure provincialization

Although a 2016 inquiry by the District Scrutiny Committee declared the petitioner’s school as the genuine original entity, the Director of Elementary Education, Assam, issued an order dated 28.04.2022 rejecting the petitioner's claim for provincialization

The rejection was based on a Joint Committee report stating the school had "zero enrollment" in the U-DISE database for 2016-17

The petitioner challenged this order, asserting that land, infrastructure, and students existed, supported by a 2017 inspection report by the Sub-Inspector (S.I.) of Schools

1. Whether the respondent authority was justified in rejecting the provincialization of the petitioner’s school based solely on the absence of U-DISE enrollment data for 2016-17 despite conflicting physical inspection reports

2. Whether the school and its staff fulfill the eligibility criteria for provincialization under the Assam Education (Provincialisation of Services of Teachers and Re-organisation of Educational Institutions) Act, 2017

Assam Education (Provincialisation of Services of Teachers and Re-organisation of Educational Institutions) Act, 2017, specifically Section 3(1)(xii), which mandates that student enrollment must be verified via DISE data from 2009-10 or earlier as maintained by NUEPA, and requires physical verification of attendance records for the last three years

Section 14 regarding the appellate process for grievances related to provincialization

The Court observed a significant contradiction between the U-DISE database and the physical inspection records. While the Director’s impugned order relied on a "nil enrollment" report from NUEPA for 2016-17 to deny provincialization, the petitioner produced a report from the S.I. of Schools dated 05.05.2017, which recorded 160 students and the presence of three teachers during a physical visit.

The Court noted that the Director failed to consider this S.I. report (Annexure-18) when passing the impugned order.

Furthermore, the Court addressed a recent spot inquiry by a Deputy Director (conducted per Court order) which found the school empty; however, it accepted the petitioner's explanation that a family bereavement had forced a sudden early closure on that specific day.

The Court concluded that the school’s chequered history—including a rival claim and DISE code disputes—warranted a fresh, holistic physical verification rather than a mechanical reliance on potentially flawed digital databases.

The Court directed the petitioner to file a fresh representation and ordered the Director of Elementary Education to conduct a de novo verification. Specifically, the Director must: (i) examine the veracity of the 2017 S.I. report; (ii) investigate why enrollment was not reflected in U-DISE after 2009-10; and (iii) depute an official (not below the rank of DEEO) to conduct a physical inspection of the land, infrastructure, and attendance with prior notice to the petitioner within three months.