PRANAB KUMAR CHATTOPADHYAY, J. - (1.) THE appellants herein are aggrieved by the steps taken by the School Education Department, Government of West Bengal against the Kurmail Sonaulla High School and also for approval of the same by the learned Single Judge by the impugned judgment and order under appeal.
(2.) IT appears from the records that the school authorities applied to the District Inspector of Schools (SE), Dakshin Dinajpur for issuance of prior permission in order to fill up the Group-D post of Matron. The said District Inspector of Schools (SE), Dakshin Dinajpur accorded the permission for filling up the said post. The school authorities, thereafter, submitted requisition to the District Employment Exchange for sponsoring the names of the eligible candidates for filling up the said post of Matron. The District Employment Exchange, Balurghat sponsored the names of 20 candidates and an advertisement was also issued by the school authorities inviting applications from eligible candidates for filling up the said Group-D post of (Matron). The Managing Committee of the School, thereafter, formed a Selection Committee and called the candidates who were sponsored by the Employment Exchange and also the candidates who applied in response to the advertisement for an interview. The Selection Committee held the interview and prepared a panel of three candidates on the basis of the said interview. The Managing Committee also approved the panel and submitted the same along with all relevant papers to the District Inspector of Schools (SE), Dakshin Dinajpur for his approval on 13th January, 2010. The respondent no. 1 herein filed the writ petition being W.P. No. 899 (W) of 2010 on 14th January, 2010 which was finally disposed of by the impugned judgment and order under appeal passed by the learned Single Judge on 12th May, 2010. In the said writ petition it was alleged that at the end of the interview respondent no.1/writ petitioner was told that she had secured top position in the panel. It has also been alleged by the respondent no.1/writ petitioner that the appellants herein had influenced the members of the Selection Committee to change the original panel by way of manipulation and original score sheets were altered in order to place the respondent no.11 herein at the top of the panel. According to the respondent no.1/writ petitioner, appellants herein illegally favoured the respondent no.11 as she was the daughter of a member of the Managing Committee of the said school. The said respondent no.1/writ petitioner also submitted a representation on 11th January, 2010 before the District Inspector of Schools (SE), Dakshin Dinajpur for conducting appropriate enquiry in respect of preparation of the panel in question and also prayed for including her name in the first position of the panel after canceling the name of the respondent no.11 herein. From the records we also find that three members of the Managing Committee also submitted a similar representation before the President of the Managing Committee of the concerned school praying for rectification of the panel already prepared for the post of Matron by altering the same upon placing the name of the respondent no.1/writ petitioner herein at the top of the said panel. It also appears from the records that the District Inspector of Schools accorded necessary approval to the said panel on 15th January, 2010. It is not in dispute that the letter of approval of the aforesaid panel was collected on behalf of the school authorities from the office of District Inspector of Schools on the same day i.e. on 15th January, 2010. Thereafter, the Secretary of the Managing Committee of the said school issued the appointment letter to the first empanelled candidate, Smt. Bisakha Barman, the respondent No. 11 herein and sent the same by registered post on 16th January, 2010. The said Bisakha Barman came to the School with the appointment letter on the same day, i.e., on 16th January, 2010 for joining the service and the school authorities allowed her to join the duty in the post of Matron in the school at about 10.55 A.M. on that very day. From the records we find that the writ petition filed by the respondent no.1 herein was moved before the learned Single Judge on 11th February, 2010 i.e. long after joining of the respondent no.11 in the post of Matron in the said school. The learned Single Judge directed the District Inspector of Schools (SE), Dakshin Dinajpur to produce all records relevant to the selection process of Group-D staff (Matron) of the concerned school. The learned Counsel of the State-respondents produced the relevant records before the learned Single Judge on 2nd March, 2010. The learned Single Judge upon hearing the submissions of the respective parties directed the Secretary, School Education Department, Government of West Bengal to constitute a committee to enquire into the allegations made in the writ petition and file a report. In terms of the said order dated 2nd March, 2010, report was submitted before the learned Single Judge on 28th April, 2010.
(3.) UPON pursuing the said report the learned Single Judge passed further order on 28th April, 2010 directing the Secretary, School Education Department, Government of West Bengal to apprise the court as to what action was being contemplated by the Government of West Bengal against the school as well as the concerned District Inspector of Schools (SE), Dakshin Dinajpur. Pursuant to the said order, Secretary, School Education Department, Government of West Bengal prepared a report and submitted the same before the learned Single Judge on 12th May, 2010 in order to apprise the court about the steps taken against the aforesaid School as well as the District Inspector of Schools (SE), Dakshin Dinajpur. UPON further perusing the said report learned Single Judge found that the Government of West Bengal had initiated appropriate action against the said school as well as the concerned District Inspector of Schools (SE), Dakshin Dinajpur. In the aforesaid circumstances, the learned Single Judge expressed an opinion that the proceedings initiated by the Government of West Bengal should be concluded at an early date preferably within a period of four months from the date of communication of the said order of the learned Single Judge. The learned Single Judge also directed the respondent authorities not to fill up the vacancy for the post in question till the show-cause notice to be issued by the Director of the School Education against the Managing Committee of the concerned school is finally adjudicated upon. In the said order, learned Single Judge further observed that upon completion of the proceedings initiated by the State, if it transpires that the writ petitioner's contention is correct then the State shall take appropriate steps to see that the writ petitioner is not deprived of what she is otherwise entitled to in law. With the aforesaid observations and directions, the learned Single Judge finally disposed of the writ petition by the aforesaid order dated 12th May, 2010. Being aggrieved by the aforesaid order dated 12th May, 2010 passed by the learned Single Judge, Secretary and the Headmaster of the concerned school preferred the appeal before this court and also filed an application for stay in connection with the said appeal. Both the appeal and the stay application were taken up for hearing for final disposal. The learned Counsel of the appellants submitted that there was no illegality and/or irregularity in the process of selection and issuance of appointment letter to the first empanelled candidate. Relying on the report of the Deputy Director of School Education (W), West Bengal dated 12th April, 2010, Mrs. Chandrima Bhattacharyya, learned Counsel of the appellants submitted that the panel of eligible candidates was prepared by the Selection Committee as per Recruitment Rules which was duly accepted by the Managing Committee and forwarded to the District Inspector of Schools (SE), Dakshin Dinajpur for according necessary approval. Mrs. Bhattacharyya further submitted that the concerned District Inspector of Schools (SE), Dakshin Dinajpur committed no wrong by approving the said panel. Mrs. Bhattacharyya also submitted that the grievances of the writ petitioner are nothing but a desperate attempt of an unsuccessful candidate to upset a valid selection with the help of a section of the members of the Managing Committee of the concerned school.;