- (1.) When a disciplinary proceeding against a delinquent assistant teacher of Bahirkhand Girish Institution, Hooghly, entered in the second stage of such disciplinary proceeding after the first stage of this disciplinary proceeding was approved by the Section 24 Committee of the West Bengal Board of Secondary Education, the said delinquent teacher has filed this writ petition not only by challenging the first stage of the disciplinary proceeding including the legality and/or validity of the grant of approval thereto by the Section 24 Committee but also by challenging the second show cause notice, primarily on the ground of violation of Principles of Natural Justice and also on the ground of biasness on the part of school authority by not appointing an impartial and non-controversial enquiry officer for holding an enquiry into the charges labeled against the said delinquent teacher.
(2.) A charge sheet was issued by the school authority on 18 th May, 2007 whereby the petitioner was called upon to reply to the charges contained in the said charge sheet within 15 days from the date of receipt of said charge sheet. The petitioner did not submit any reply to the said charge sheet. When a hearing notice was given to the petitioner, he complained about non-supply of the documents which were referred to in Annexure-III of the said charge sheet. It was contended by him that he was unable to participate in the said enquiry proceeding effectively unless the copies of those documents were supplied to him before holding such enquiry.
(3.) Under such circumstances, another charge sheet containing identical charges along with the statement of imputation and the list of documents together with the copies of the documents mentioned therein were supplied to the petitioner along with the forwarding letter of the school authority dated 26 th June, 2007. Though, the petitioner wanted to impress upon this Court that the disciplinary proceeding cannot proceed on the second charge sheet dated 26 th June, 2007 without abandoning the first charge sheet dated 18 th May, 2007, but this Court does not find any substance in such contention of the petitioner as the charge sheet which was supplied to the petitioner along with the letter of the school authority on 26 th June, 2007 was really a verbatim copy of the earlier charge sheet which was supplied to him on 18 th May, 2007. The charge sheet which is described as the second charge sheet by the petitioner was, in fact, not the second charge sheet but the same was a copy of the charge sheet dated 18 th May, 2007 which was supplied to him earlier. The subsequent charge sheet dated 26 th June, 2007 was forwarded to the petitioner as the petitioner complained about non-supply of the documents which were mentioned in Annexure-III of the charge sheet dated 18 th May, 2007. In fact, the charge sheet dated 26 th June, 2007 is a complete one and the same was served upon the petitioner only to avoid future controversy regarding violation of the Principles of Natural Justice due to non-supply of the documents mentioned in Annexure-III to the charge sheet dated 18 th May, 2007.;