Soumen Sen,J. - (1.) The appeal is arising out of an order dated 3rd March, 2020 in connection with the writ petition in which the appellant/writ petitioner challenged the order dated 2nd March, 2016 refusing his claim for higher scale of pay. The appellant/writ petitioner participated in the Selection Process at 4th RLST, of 2010, conducted by the West Bengal Madrassa Service Commission and after being selected his name was recommended for appointment to the post of assistant teacher in Chemistry (Hons.) in the respondent Madrassa on 22nd June, 2011. At the relevant time he was holding B.SC. (Hons.) degree in Chemistry. He was appointed to the Madrasah on vide appointment letter dated 18th July 2011 and joined his service on 21st July, 2011. Before his appointment the petitioner was pursuing his higher study i.e. M.SC. in Chemistry in Aligarh Muslim University for enhancement of his qualification since 2010. The appellant completed his M.SC. Part-I examination i.e. 1st and 2nd semester in the month of June, July 2011 before joining his service in the said post. After joining his service the appellant on 1st July, 2012 applied for permission to complete his higher study of M.SC. part-II examination. The Managing Committee by a resolution dated 15th July 2012 granted such permission without any pay from 1st September, 2012 till 31st May, 2013 for study leave and the said resolution was forwarded to the District Inspector of Schools (S.E.) Murshidabad on 19th July, 2012. The appellant successfully passed the examination and secured 1st Division in the examination held on 19th May, 2013. On the basis of such improvement of his qualification in the relevant subject the appellant applied for higher scale of pay on 12th August, 2014 to the Head Master of the said school who in turn forwarded the said letter to the District Inspector of Schools for sanctioning higher scale of pay by a letter dated 18th May, 2015. The District Inspector rejected the said claim on the ground that the appellant did not seek prior permission of concerned District Inspector of Schools (S.E) for obtaining such higher qualification. In absence of such prior permission the claim for higher scale of pay cannot be entertained and accordingly rejected the claim of the writ petitioner. This was challenged before the learned Single Judge in W.P. No. 7217(w) of 2016. The learned Single Judge relying upon paragraph 3 of the notification dated 27 November, 2007 bearing No.539- SE/B published under the West Bengal School (Control and Expenditure) Act 2005 dismissed the writ petition as the said Rule requires a teacher to seek prior permission of concerned District Inspector of Schools for obtaining such higher qualification through the Managing Committee of the School. The learned Single Judge was of the view that the order of the District Inspector is well reasoned and has been passed after taking into consideration of the relevant facts and circumstances including the extent law. It was further held that in absence of any permission granted by the concerned District Inspector of schools to the petitioner which was mandatorily required, the writ petitioner is not entitled to such relief.
(2.) Mr. Shaktipada Jana, the learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the appellant submits that there may not be any requirement of any prior permission before the appellant participated in the examination as before his appointment of assistant teacher he was pursuing his M.SC. course and he sought for permission from the Managing Committee so that he could complete his course successfully within the scheduled period. It is submitted that the reliance on paragraph 3 of Government Order dated 27th November, 2007 was misplaced and is not applicable to the case of the writ petitioner. It is submitted that the said Rule could be relevant where the petitioner after joining the post as a graduate, wants to pursue higher studies. It is further submitted that this Bench had the occasion to consider a similar situation in the State of West Bengal Vs. Meghnath Roy in MAT 514 of 2019 and after considering the rival submissions the matter was referred to the District Inspector of Schools to dispose of the claim of Meghnath Roy after taking into consideration the guidelines straight way in the said order.
(3.) Per contra the learned Counsel for appellant submitted that the learned Single Judge was perfectly justified in relying upon paragraph 3 of the Government Order dated 27th November, 2007 in dismissing the writ petition.;