Bhaskar Bhattacharya, J. - (1.)By this writ application, the writ petitioner, a teacher of the concerned school initially prayed for direction upon the respondents to revoke the order of suspension dated 18th Aug., 1993 issued by the Secretary, Managing Committee of the school and the order dated 5th Jan., 1995 passed by the Appeal Committee, West Bengal Board of Secondary Education approving such action. In the said writ application, the writ petitioner also prayed for direction upon the respondents to allow the petitioner to join the school in view of the fact that no formal proceeding was drawn up within 90 days in terms of Rule 28(9)(vii)(a) of the Management Rules.
(2.)It appears from record that the Managing Committee of the School by a letter dated 18th Aug., 1993 informed her that by the resolution of the Managing Committee adopted in its emergency meeting held on 18th Aug., 1993 in exercise of the power conferred by Rule 28(9)(vii)(a) of the Management of Non- Government Institutions (Aided and Unaided) Rules, 1969 had suspended the petitioner with immediate effect for an indefinite period. In the said letter it was further stated that proceedings against her were being initiated. Subsequently, the Secretary of the school by a letter dated 13th Sept., 1993 communicated to the petitioner and another teacher named Somnath Mukherjee about the resolution of the Managing Committee and asked both of them to inform if they had anything to say on the basis of such resolution. It may not be out place to mention here that in the resolution dated 18th Aug., 1993 it was stated that the petitioner and the said Somnath Mukherjee, a bachelor teacher had extra marital affairs and such facts are talked about and those were also reflected in their conversations and conduct. It was further stated that some anonymous posters were placed on the school building involving those two teachers. It further appeared from the resolution that on 14th Aug., 1993 the petitioner made allegations against Sri Somnath Mukherjee before police and on the basis of such allegation Sri Mukherjee was arrested. However, according to the sa resolution, their conducts ill befit teachers of a school and for the protection of the environment of school it was decided to suspend both the teachers for indefinite point of time. In the said resolution direction was given for framing charge-sheet against those persons. Ultimately, the following charge-sheet was issued against the petitioner:
(1) Although the petitioner is married and mother of children, she is involved in extra-marital affairs with Sri Somnath Mukherjee, a bachelor younger in age. The school has in its possession, letters exchanged between them and the petitioner may inspect those letters within seven days.

(2) On 27th Feb., 1993 and 6th March, 1993, the petitioner and the said Somnath Mukherjee were found in compromising position within school campus. Several allegations were made to the school authority and there was anonymous postering, as a result, Head Master and the Secretary previously cautioned the petitioner and she undertook before the Head Master and the Secretary of the School not to be have indecently, but, such undertaking had not been honoured.

(3) On Aug. 14, 1993, the petitioner went to the residence of Somnath Mukherjee where he resided alone and there, due to some incident the petitioner had made allegations against Somnath Mukherjee before police and on that basis Somnath Mukherjee was arrested on 16th Aug., 1993. Such matter is pending before court.

(4) In view of the aforesaid allegations, the environment of the school had suffered and created bad examples to the students concerned. Several posters had been affixed on the school and the guardians were making demand for the punishment of the petitioner. As a result, there was disturbance in the school.

(5) The aforesaid conduct of the petitioner amounts to misconduct and unsubordination.
During the pendency of this writ application, the writ petitioner had affirmed a supplementary affidavit drawing attention of the Court to the fact that against similar charge-. sheet, Somnath Mukherjee moved a writ application before this Court and the Honourable Mr. Justice G.C. Gupta by order dated 6th Dec., 2001 had quashed the disciplinary proceeding initiated against the said Somnath Mukherjee pursuant to the charge-sheet dated 16th Dec., 1993 and the said Somnath Mukherjee was directed to be reinstated forthwith. It is alleged that against such order, the school authority or Board had not preferred any appeal and they accepted the decision of G.C. Gupta, J. It is further pointed out that since the same allegation against Somnath Mukherjee had been quashed, the present proceeding against the petitioner could not continue and she should be directed to join service with a direction to pay all back wages.
(3.)The school authority had filed affidavit-in-opposition to the aforesaid supplementary affidavit stating that the order of quashing of disciplinary proceeding against Somnath Mukherjee could not stand in the way of school authority in proceeding against the petitioner. It was pointed out that in this case, the school authority had already taken decision to dismiss the petitioner from service and communicated such decision to Board for approval. But due to interim order passed by this Court Board was not taking any action.
;