Anil Kumar Sen, J. - (1.) Being aggrieved by a decision of the Appeal Committee of the West Bengal Board of Secondary Education in Appeal No. 68 of 1967 dated September 7, 1970 the petitioners who are some of the present members of the Managing Committee of Gohaldanga High School (hereinafter referred to as the said School) have obtained the present Rule on an application under Article 226 (i) of the Constitution for quashing the said decision. By the impugned decision the Appeal Committee had set aside an earlier order of the Managing Committee discharging a teacher from the school dated April 8, 1967 and had directed his reinstatement. The teacher, the appellant before the Appeal Committee is respondent No. 3, Harisadhan Roy.
(2.) The facts are shortly as follows:- In the year 1966 the members of the Managing Committee of the said school fell out amongst themselves. The then Secretary and the President of the Managing Committee appointed a new Headmaster though it is claimed that such appointment was made without the sanction of the Managing Committee and without removing the permanent Headmaster, Paresh Nath Roy, petitioner No. 3, before this Court. Such disputes led to a civil suit in which the newly appointed Headmaster was injuncted from interfering with the administration of the school on November 30, 1966. The suit, however, ended in a compromise in this year 1968. The old President, the Secretary and the newly appointed Headmaster parted making over charge of the administration to the present petitioners and respondent Nos. 6, 7 and 8.
(3.) It appears that during the aforesaid dispute one Amar Nath Roy a teacher and the present respondent No. 3, the other teacher were abiding by the direction of the then Secretary and the newly appointed Headmaster. After the injunction was obtained against the newly appointed Headmaster two charge sheets were issued some time in March. 1967 one against Amar Nath Roy and the other against the present respondent No. 3, Harisadhan Roy. There were four charges against Amar Nath Roy, but eight charges against the present respondent No. 3. Harisadhan Roy though the four charges against Amar Nath Roy are also common with four of the charges against present respondent No. 3. Both of them in answer to the said charge sheet submitted explanations denying broadly the allegations made and claiming that the charges are not bona fide. Both of them, however, took the defence that as the suit was still pending the disciplinary proceedings could not proceed. The petitioners in the Managing Committee, however, adopted a resolution on April 8. 1967 and discharged the said two teachers from service. Both of them preferred appeals under section 22(3) of the West Bengal Board of Secondary Education Act, 1963 (hereinafter referred to as the said Act) to the Appeal Committee of the Board. The appeal of Amar Nath Roy, being Appeal No. 69 of 1967 was heard and disposed of on September 1.7, 1968 and was dismissed. The Committee held, "the materials on record show that the dismissal was justified on the charges as brought by the Managing Committee. There was no satisfactory explanation to the charges levelled against the appellant. The order of dismissal should stand.";