- (1.) On 26 9.75 I directed that the copies of the application be served upon respondent Nos. 1, 2, 4, 5 and 7 by registered post with acknowledgement due by the learned Advocate for the petitioner. No rule was issued on that date. Thereafter, an affidavit of service has been filed showing that the copies of the application have been served upon the respondents in October, 1975 but even then no one appeared on behalf of the respondents to contest this application. In the circumstances, let a rule be issued calling upon the opposite parties to show cause why a writ of Mandamus should not be issued commanding the West Bengal Board of Secondary Education to implement the decision of the Appeal Committee. The Rule is treated ready as regards service as the service of the petition has already been made by the learned Advocate for the petitioner upon the respondents in the month of October 1975. Let the rule be treated as on day's list.
(2.) The petitioner was working as the Headmistress of Parbati Devi Balika Vidyalaya at Raigunj in the district of West Dinajpur. She was suspended by the Managing Committee of the school with effect from 16.9 67 on certain charges which were proposed to be enquired into. She moved this Court and got an order of injunction restraining the managing committee from giving effect to the order of suspension. That Rule was discharged. The petitioner was directed to move the Appeal Committee. It is the case of the petitioner that after the order of this Court which was communicated to the managing committee, she was again placed under suspension from the month of December, 1972. The period of suspension is unduly long and during this period she has not been getting any salary from the school. The petitioner has been receiving the government dearness allowance but not her salary. It is not disputed that during the period of suspension she is entitled to get subsistence allowance. The petitioner preferred an appeal to the Appeal Committee of the Board of Secondary Education. The Appeal Committee resolved that the managing committee of the school be directed to complete the proposed enquiry against the petitioner within a period of two months from the date of receipt of that order. Meanwhile,the petitioner, namely, the appellant shall be paid subsistence allowance at the rate of 75% of her pay per month with effect from December, 1972 and on completion of the enquiry the managing committee should inform the Appeal Committee of the action taken, if any, against the appellant. Thereafter, the petitioner made various representations to the managing committee of the school but the managing committee did not take any step whatsoever for holding any enquiry against the petitioner even after the decision of the Appeal Committee. The order of suspension has not also been revoked and the managing committee did not implement the decision of the Appeal Committee by which the petitioner was entitled to get subsistence allowance at the rate of 75% of her pay per month with effect from December, 1972.
(3.) The Appeal Regulations have been made by the West Bengal Board of Secondary Education under sub section (3) of section 27 read with sub-section (3) of section 22 of the West Bengal Board of Secondary Education Act, 1963. And the said Regulations have been published as required by the Statute. Regulation 11 (3) provides: "If the appellant or the Managing Committee is found unwilling to comply with the decision referred to in sub-regulation (2) within thirty days from the date of receipt thereof or until such period as may be extended by the Board, such non-compliance shall be considered as a sufficient ground for the Board to take against such party any step, not inconsistent with the Act or the Rules made thereunder, which the Board may deem fit and necessary." In Parul Sengupta v. West Bengal Board of Secondary Education, 1975 (1) CLJ 57 this Court construed the said provision of Regulation 11 (3) and held that the said provision is mandatory in terms and it casts an obligation on the Board to enforce an order of the Appeal Committee, if the managing committee fails or refuses to comply with the order as otherwise the entire scheme of providing an appeal and adjudication thereon would amount to an useless formality. The Board being a statutory authority, and the Regulations being statutory the obligation is undisputedly enforceable. In view of the above decision of this Court which Ir respectfully agree, let a mandate do issue on the respondent, West Bengal Board of Secondary Education directing the said Board to implement the order of the Appeal Committee dated 24th January, 1975 in accordance with Regulation 11 (3) of the Appeal Regulations within two months from the date of receipt of this order.;