- (1.) THE petitioner was an aspirant for the post of Siksha Samprasarak in English in Gobindapur Madhyamik Siksha Kendra under Raipur Gram Panchayat, within Hariharpara Panchayat Samity in the District of Murshidabad. Though the petitioner had the requisite eligibility for the said post but he could not participate in the selection process for the said post for want of wide publication of the said recruitment process. It is alleged that the concerned authority completed the said selection process without following the relevant guidelines and/or orders issued by the Government in this regard and ultimately the respondent no.10 was selected for his engagement as Siksha Samprasarak in English in the said M.S.K. However, the selection of the respondent no.10 was ultimately challenged in a writ petition being W.P. No. 16909(W) of 2008 (Afajuddin Sk. Vs. State of West Bengal and Ors.) and on the basis of an order passed by a learned Single Judge of this Court in the said writ petition, the District Nodal Officer, S.S.K. and M.S.K., Murshidabad, considered the complain regarding the irregularities allegedly committed by the concerned authorities in the process of selection of the respondent no.10 as Siksha Samprasarak in English in the said M.S.K. after hearing the interested person and ultimately held on 30th December, 2008 that the said selection was made without following the guidelines issued by the Government in this regard. THE said District Nodal Officer found that wide publicity of employment notification was not made by the Managing Committee of the said M.S.K. Various other irregularities in the process of selection of the said respondent no.10 were detected by the said District Nodal Officer as various Government orders and/or Guidelines were not followed in the process of such selection. Accordingly, the said District Nodal Officer passed an order by disengaging the respondent no.10 herein and the concerned Block Development Officer, Hariharpara was directed to see that the selection of a Samprasarak in English is strictly made in accordance with Government orders and guidelines with a further rider that the candidature of Afjuddin Sk., who was the writ petitioner in the W.P. No. 16909(W) of 2008, should be considered along with the others.
(2.) THE said order remains unchallenged. THE parties to the said proceeding including the concerned authorities accepted the said order. Even though the said order was not challenged by the concerned authority but still then the respondent no.10 herein, in fact, was not disengaged and he was allowed to render his service as Siksha Samprasarak in English in the said M.S.K. even after he was disengaged by the District Nodal Officer by his aforesaid order. However, since the respondent no.10 was not paid his honorarium though he was rendering his service as Siksha Samprasarak in English in the said M.S.K., he filed a writ petition being W.P. No. 8608(W) of 2009 before this Hon"ble Court. THE said writ petition was disposed of by a learned Single Judge of this Court on 5th August, 2009 whereby the Block Development Officer, Hariharpara, Murshidabad, being the respondent no.4 therein was directed to release the honorarium payable to the said respondent no.10 within a period of eight weeks from the date of the communication of the said order with a rider that if after verifying the records, he comes to the conclusion that his engagement and/or appointment and/or his continuation was made in accordance with Rules, then only his honorarium will be paid. Pursuant to the said order passed by His Lordship, the concerned Block Development Officer held that his engagement and continuation as Samprasarak in the said M.S.K. was made in accordance with Rules and accordingly under the direction of the said Block Development Officer honorarium was paid to the respondent no.10 with effect from 18th March, 2008 on which his engagement as Siksha Samprasarak in the said M.S.K. in English was approved by the Hariharpara Panchayat Samity. The said respondent no. 10 is still working as Sikshya Samprasarak in the said M.S.K. In this scenario the instant writ petition was filed by the petitioner herein for issuance of a writ in the nature of mandamus for commanding the respondents, their subordinates and agents to implement the order dated 30th December, 2008 passed by the District Nodal Officer, S.S.K. and M.S.K. Cell, Murshidabad, so that the direction which was issued by the District Nodal Officer for disengagement of the respondent no.10 from the said post and the direction for selection of a suitable candidate for the said post by following the Government guidelines which were given upon the concerned Block Development Officer, Hariharpara, is strictly carried out. The respondent no.10 contested this writ petition by filing affidavit contending therein that no irregularity and/or illegality was committed in the process of his selection as Siksha Samprasarak in English in the said M.S.K. It was contended by him that since his engagement was approved by the concerned Authority and further since he has also been paid his honorarium with effect from the date of approval of his engagement by the concerned Panchayat Samity on the basis of the order passed by the concerned Block Development Officer who, upon consideration of the relevant records, came to the conclusion that his engagement and continuation was made in accordance with the extant guidelines, his engagement as Siksha Samprasarak in English in the said M.S.K. cannot be disturbed after passage of three years from the date of his engagement. 4. Heard the learned Advocates for the parties. Considered the materials on record including the order impugned. Let me now consider as to how far the relief which the petitioner has claimed in the writ petition, can be granted in the facts of the instant case. I have already indicated above that the order which was passed by the District Nodal Officer by disengaging the respondent no.10 from the post of Samprasarak in English in the said M.S.K. has not been challenged by the concerned authority. As such the said order is binding upon the concerned authority. The concerned authority thus, cannot overcome the binding effect of the said order. By the said order the concerned Block Development Officer was directed to initiate a fresh selection process by observing the Government guidelines and also by considering the candidature of one Afjuddin Sk. along with the other candidates. Since the said order attained its finality, the said respondent cannot overcome its binding effect on them.
(3.) ACCORDINGLY this Court holds that the concerned Block Development Officer was not justified by holding in his order dated 21st October, 2009 that the engagement and/or continuation of the respondent no.10 as Siksha Samprasarak in English in the said M.S.K. was made in accordance with Rules. In my view his entitlement to get honorarium with effect from the date of approval of his engagement by Hariharpara Panchayat Samity, ought not to have been recognised by the said Block Development Officer. The decision which was so taken by the concerned Block Development Officer is contrary to the direction of his superior namely, the District Nodal Officer as aforesaid which attained its finality as it was not challenged by any of the parties as mentioned above. Thus this Court has no hesitation to hold that the decision which was passed by the concerned Block Development Officer on 21st October, 2009 contained in Annexure "A-14" to the affidavit in opposition filed on behalf of the said respondent no.10 at page 45 thereof cannot be retained on record. ACCORDINGLY the said order stands quashed and consequently the order of disengagement of the respondent no.10 which was passed by the District Nodal Officer on 30th December, 2008 being Annexure "P-4" to this writ petition at page 26 is required to be implemented. The engagement of the respondent no.10, thus, stands quashed. However since the respondent no.10 admittedly has rendered his services as Siksha Samprasarak in the said M.S.K., the honorarium which was paid to him for the period for which he rendered his service as Siksha Samprasarak in the said M.S.K. on the basis of the order passed by the Block Development Officer, as aforesaid, need not be refunded by him. Henceforth, he will not be paid any honorarium for the said post.;