- (1.) The Secretary of the Managing Committee of Kanai Dighi Deshpran Vidyapith is the petitioner. The School Managing Committee by a resolution, adopted in an emergent meeting held on 15.5.72, decided to terminate the services of Sasanka, an assistant teacher, forthwith. The petitioner issued a letter on the same day to Sasanka intimating him of the Managing Committee's decision. Sasanka feeling adversely affected by that decision appealed to the Appeal Committee appointed under section 22 of the West Bengal Board of Secondary Education Act, 1963 in terms of Regulation 3 of the West Bengal Board of Secondary Education (Manner of Hearing and Deciding Appeals by Appeal Committee) Regulations, 1964. The Appeal Committee met on 25.4.73 and allowed the appeal making this order: That the appeal be allowed. The appellant be reinstated in his post with effect from the date of his dismissal. He shall get from the school his salary and allowances from the date of his dismissal. He shall also get his arrears of salaries and allowances, if any from the school. The Secretary moved this Court filing this application under Article 227 of the Constitution of India against the Appeal Committee's order giving rise to this Rule and was granted interim order of stay of operation of that order dated 25.4.73. Sasanka appeared and filed a petition on 9.11.73 for vacating the interim order of stay. By consent of the petitioner and the opposite parties the main Rule was set down for hearing on 7.12.73. Sasanka, opposite party No. 3 took a preliminary objection as to the maintainability of the application under Article 227 contending that the Appeal Committee is a "domestic tribunal" not subject to the superintendence of the Court. Appeal Committee has almost all the trappings of a quasi-judicial tribunal and decides disputes between the parties before it finally, as is clear from the several regulations. Detailed procedure about the entertainment, hearing and disposal of appeals has been laid down in the Regulations. It provides for the respondent in the appeal to show cause and for the appellant to answer the show cause, if any. There are also provisions of personal hearing, to be given to the parties. The Committee has also power to direct further inquiry and is obliged to make final orders binding on the parties. This is a body created under the provisions of a statute. It is clear that the Appeal Committee is a tribunal and that this Court has superintendence under Article 227 over it and in respect of orders made by it. The preliminary objection is thus, over-ruled.
(2.) It was next submitted by the opposite party that the appeal, filed by the Stecretary alone and not by all the members of the Managing Committee was not entertainable. The petitioner Secretary has subsequently added all the other members of the Managing Committee as parties. It has also to be noted that the Secretary issued letter of termination in obedience to the resolution of the Managing Commutes and it is his letter that was made ineffective by the order of the Appeal Committee. I am unable to say that this application is not entertainable on this score. The second objection is thus over-ruled.
(3.) It is submitted by the petitioner that the order of the Appeal Committee is bad as it has no jurisdiction to set aside the order of dismissal or removal, and or to order of reinstatement in case of 'termination'. It is further submitted that the Appeal Committee has wrongly decided the appeal finally, firstly in not considering whether the order of the Managing Committee is an order of termination or of removal or dismissal and secondly, in not recording the reasons for its decision as is mandatory under Regulation 9(2). I am unable to give effect to this contention. An appeal lies against any order of Managing Committee which affects adversely a teacher as provided under Regulation 3. When an appeal lies, the Appeal Committee has certainly jurisdiction and is also required to make final order in that appeal. As is clear from Regulation 11 an order of termination, if subject matter of appeal, has either to be confirmed or to be set aside, if no further inquiry is directed. There was, therefore, no want of jurisdiction in the Appeal Committee to dispose of or determine the appeal.;