Harish Tandon, J. - (1.) The petitioners have assailed the order passed by the Chairman, District Primary School Council. Malda vide Memo No. 95 (4)/ DPSE/Law dated 23rd December 2005 whereby and whereunder an application of the petitioners, claiming appointment on compassionate ground, is rejected.
(2.) This is the fourth round of litigation by the petitioners before this Court. On earlier three occasions, the Chairman, District Primary School Council, Malda rejected the applications citing one ground or the other but this Court set the said decisions aside. Lastly, on 14th September 2005 this Court directed the Chairman, District Primary School Council, Malda to consider the issue of appointment on compassionate ground on merit without relying upon the income from pension and/or the retiral benefit within the stipulated period. This time again, the said authority rejected the said application on the ground that the petitioner No. 1 was allowed to retire one year and three months prior to the date of superannuation and the family of the petitioner No. 1 does not suffer any financial hardship.
(3.) It appears that the said authority, without recording any details relating to financial stability of the family of the petitioner No. 1, has simply come to a conclusion that his family is not in financial distress. Administrative authority cannot escape its liability and/or responsibility by not assigning reasons while passing administrative orders/decisions.;