- (1.) In these two proceedings, the petitioners are seeking direction upon the District Primary School Council Howrah for appointing them as primary teachers in the Udaynarayanpur Circle or any Circle nearby in the District of Howrah. The factual background of these two petitions and the legal issues involved are near-identical. These proceedings were heard analogous and are being disposed of by this common judgment. The petitioners' quest for employment in such capacity had started in the year 1979 when they participated in an interview for such posts. Subsequently, there has been several proceedings on that issue and I shall refer to some of these litigations later in this judgment, whenever necessary. In C.O. No. 12403, there are eight petitioners, but one of them, Sri. Krishna Chandra Bhowmick has passed away during subsistence of the proceeding. He was the sixth petitioner in that proceeding, to which I shall henceforth refer to as the first petition. His claim thus does not survive and in any event there is no substitution application by his legal heirs. The first writ petition has abated so far as petitioner no. 6 is concerned. The rest of the petitioners are same in both these petitions. Among them, Tapan Kumar Hazra, Sisir Kumar Kheto, Ashok Kumar Kheto, Sachi Dulal Bera and Bhupal Chandra Bera have crossed the employable age. Thus, on the question of appointment, which was the main prayer of the petitioners when these proceedings were instituted, claims of only Samir Kumar Kheto and Murari Mohan Mondal survive. Foundation of their claim is that they were at all material times eligible to be appointed as primary teachers having completed their junior basic training from a basic training institute and fulfilled other qualification criteria. The other point on which they found their claim is on certain judicial pronouncements, which I shall refer to in the subsequent part of this judgment. There has been some reference to applicable law in the facts of these cases, as when the subject-selection process had started, the West Bengal Primary Education 1973 had been enacted, but by virtue of a Repeal and continuance provision contained in Section 105 of the said statute, Rules framed under the West Bengal (Rural) Primary Education Act, 1930 and the West Bengal (Rural) Primary Education (Temporary Provisions) Act, 1969 were made applicable in respect of the subject selection process. But the controversy involved in these proceedings relate to general principles pertaining to service jurisprudence. As such, it would not be necessary to refer to or construe any specific statutory provision for adjudication of these proceedings.
(2.) The factual basis of both these writ petitions remain the same, except that in the later proceeding, which has been registered as W.P. No. 18583 (W) of 1997, (the second petition), a memorandum in the form of an order of the Chairman, Ad Hoc Committee, Howrah District Primary School Council dated 5 February 1997 is additionally under challenge. This memorandum was issued in response to a representation made on behalf of the petitioners in terms of an order passed by a learned Single Judge of this Court in an application taken out in connection with C.O. No. 12403 (W) of 1993. That order was passed on 12 October 1993. No affidavit has been filed on behalf of the respondents in these two matters, and the stand of the respondents resisting the claim of the petitioners becomes ascertainable primarily from the order of the Chairman, Ad Hoc Committee, Howrah District Primary School Council passed on 5 February 1997.
(3.) The petitioners appeared in an interview as per direction of the President, Ad Hoc Committee, District School Board, Howrah on 21 November 1982 for the said posts before the interview Committee for being empanelled as primary school teachers under the District School Board, Howrah. The petitioners claim to fulfill the eligibility criteria for that purpose and that question is not in dispute in these two proceedings. The interview was taken, as pleaded in both these proceedings, by Barin Koley and Pannalal Majhi who at the material point of time were members of the State Legislative Assembly, and Sambhu Charan Bose and Nemai Chandra Mondal. It appears that at that point of time the Selection Committee was required to be constituted in terms of a Government Order dated 24 March 1972 bearing No. 366-Edn (P)/10-R. The legal validity of composition of the Selection Committee was questioned by the petitioners in an earlier proceeding, which was originally registered as C.O. No. 5499 (W) of 1983, and later renumbered as C.R. No. 9098 (W) of 1983 after issue of Rule. In that writ petition the petitioners wanted to prevent the authorities from proceeding with the selection process, for which interview letters were issued to them. In C.R. No. 9098 (W) of 1983, the petitioners had questioned the formation of selection committee, which was constituted on the basis of an Executive Order issued under memorandum No. 459-Edn (P)/3P-16/81 dated 4 August 1981. By this memorandum, all panels were directed to be prepared by the District School Boards/the District Inspector of Schools (Pry. Education) as the case may be, from amongst the names obtained from the Employment Exchanges of the district concerned. It was contended on behalf of the petitioners that under the provisions of the Rules framed under the Bengal (Rural) Primary Education Act, 1930, the selection committee was to be set up by the Director of Public Instruction, West Bengal with the approval of the State Government.;