|
Shillong, Feb. 3: The Shillong bench of Gauhati High Court today granted another month’s time to the CBI to complete the probe into the alleged anomalies in the appointment of assistant teachers in government lower primary schools in Meghalaya.
On October 21 last year, Justice T. Vaiphei had directed the investigating agency to wrap up the probe within a period of three months from the date of receipt of the judgment. Justice Vaiphei was adjudicating on a case of nine writ petitions filed by aggrieved applicants from various pockets of the state after information obtained through the Right to Information Act, 2005, brought to light various discrepancies and manipulation in the appointment of assistant teachers in 2009-10.
Going by the October judgment, the CBI should submit the investigation report within this month.
“After hearing the plea made by the CBI, the court has agreed to grant another month’s time to the agency to complete the investigation,” a CBI counsel and senior advocate V.K. Jindal told The Telegraph. He said the extension was required, as the agency could not cross-examine many of the witnesses in view of winter vacations.
While refusing to comment on the progress of the investigation, Jindal said till date, around 270 witnesses, including government officials, have been quizzed by the CBI.
The court will again hear the matter on March 5, the senior advocate said.
It may be mentioned that in 2010, a group of candidates for posts in Jowai, Jaintia Hills district, unearthed massive irregularities/manipulation in the selection and appointment of assistant teachers in lower primary schools.
As the state authorities paid no heed to their pleas, they decided to approach the court via a writ petition in April-May 2010. Teachers from other pockets like East Khasi Hills, Amlarem (Jaintia Hills), Tura and other areas under West Garo Hills also followed suit.
On October 21 last year, Justice Vaiphei, had said, “On the basis of the inquiry report so submitted, the respondent authorities shall take necessary and consequential actions, including cancellation of the entire selection processes and the appointments already made in connection with and re-starting of the recruitment process to fill up the posts in question within a period of two months thereafter.”
He had also said if the petitioners were still aggrieved by the decision of the state respondents, they were at a liberty to approach the court again for further orders.
| 
