- (1.) This is the second round of litigation between the same parties during the last two months. The genesis of the dispute is the proposal of the managing committee of Jeeva Shiva Mission Kiran Chandra Girls High School (hereafter the school) to place one of its teachers, the fifth respondent, under suspension in contemplation of disciplinary proceeding.
(2.) Insofar as the undisputed facts are concerned, it is noticed that the managing committee issued an order on December 28, 2013 placing the fifth respondent under suspension with immediate effect pending drawal of a disciplinary proceeding against her, whereafter approval of the step to place her under suspension was sought for from the Administrator of the West Bengal Board of Secondary Education (hereafter the Board), the second respondent, on December 30, 2013. A charge-sheet dated February 13, 2014 was issued against the fifth respondent citing instances of alleged acts and activities perpetrated by her amounting to misconduct. The fifth respondent answered the charges by submitting a reply on March 3, 2014. Allegedly, on due consideration of such reply, the managing committee had forwarded a proposal to the second respondent to grant first stage approval for proceeding further against the fifth respondent. Such proposal was forwarded by the managing committee on March 19, 2014 on the basis of its understanding of the provisions of Rules 28(8) and 28(8a) of the Rules for Management of Recognised Non-Government Institutions (Aided and Unaided), 1969 (hereafter the Rules). Reminders followed on May 22, July 2 and August 14, 2014, whereafter hearing was arranged by the Board on September 16 and September 19, 2014. According to the managing committee, nothing fruitful yielded and no decision was communicated by the second respondent. In the meanwhile, the fifth respondent had appealed against the order of suspension before the Appeal Committee of the Board and on receipt of notice, the managing committee has been duly contesting it.
(3.) A writ petition dated November 12, 2014 was presented before this Court by the managing committee claiming a direction on the second respondent to decide the proposal for grant of approval of first stage of disciplinary proceeding against the fifth respondent and for a further direction on the Board not to proceed with the appeal that had been preferred by the fifth respondent.;