Ashoke Kumar Dasadhikari, J. - (1.) The controversy as made out in this writ, petition is that the selection of the private respondent who was first empanelled candidate in the panel prepared for recommendation in the post of Headmaster in Pandua Sultania High Madrasa is illegal and the empanelment private respondent should be cancelled. Mr. Sanyal appearing for the writ petitioner submits that the petitioner is a highly qualified person and he has secured high percentage of marks as would appear from mark sheets annexed. However, the selection was not properly made. Therefore, his client is entitled to get higher position and that he should be placed in the panel as first candidate. Mr. Sanyal submits that at the time of moving this writ petition there was an interim order. The first empanelled candidate subsequently recommended by School Service Commission has joined the other School, namely Pandua Sashibhushan Saha Uchha Vidyalaya [HS]. Therefore, there is no scope for giving him appointment. However, the post for which panel was prepared, is still lying vacant and the writ petitioner should be recommended for the said post of Headmaster.
(2.) The learned counsel appearing for the School Service Commission submits that the Madrasa Service Commission is required to be made a party since they are having the authority now for such recommendation. He also submits there is no mistake in such selection and preparation of panel. Mr. Sanyal, in reply, submits that at the relevant point of time School Service Commission was the authority for such recommendation. Therefore, they should be directed to recommend the petitioner.
(3.) Heard the learned counsel appearing for the parties and considered the submissions made by them as well as the materials available on record. After going through the records I find that the writ petitioner is very competent person and his qualification is M.A. B.Ed. The petitioner secured higher marks than the private respondent. In my view, the School Service Commission ought to have recommended the name of the writ petitioner for appointment as Headmaster of the concerned School. Since the private respondent has joined in the other School and the present writ petitioner is a very highly qualified and experienced teacher for being appointed as Headmaster of the said Madrasa and is second in the panel the School Service Commission is directed to recommend his name for his appointment as Headmaster in the concerned Madrasa. Accordingly, I direct the School Service Commission to recommend the name of the writ petitioner for being appointed as Headmaster of the concerned Madrasa. The entire exercise is to be completed within a period of four weeks from the date of communication of this order. The respondent no. 7 is directed to act on the basis of the recommendation which is to be given by the School Service Commission.;