KALIDAS GANGOPADHYAY Vs. STATE OF WEST BENGAL
LAWS(CAL)-1996-5-8
HIGH COURT OF CALCUTTA
Decided on May 10,1996

KALIDAS GANGOPADHYAY,AJAI KR.RAI,SURENDRA RAI Appellant
VERSUS
STATE OF WEST BENGAL Respondents


Cited Judgements :-

UTPAL MAN WITH PARTHA BASU AND KAMAL KRISHNA DUTTA VS. JYOTIRMOY SEN AND STATE OF WEST BENGAL [LAWS(CAL)-2001-5-54] [REFERRED TO]
SORMAN ALI VS. STATE OF WEST BENGAL AND OTHERS [LAWS(CAL)-2001-8-94] [REFERRED TO]


JUDGEMENT

G.R.Bhattacharjee, J. - (1.)The writ petitioners of all these writ petitions are aggrieved by and victims of the decisions of the School Education Department (Secondary Branch) of the Government of West Bengal as communicated by its Assistant Secretary to the Director of School Education under his No. 904-SE (Secy) dated the 19th December, 1994, the relevant portion of which runs thus :-
"Sub: Claim for higher scale of Pay from teachers enhancing qualification from Himachal Pradesh University through correspondence course. "The undersigned is directed to refer to the subject noted above and to say that the State Government in Education (School) Department as a matter of policy, have not agreed to recognise a decree /diploma/ Master Degree etc. acquired through correspondence course from any University etc, as equivalent to a regular course conducted by recognised Universities. "As such, the question of extending the benefit of higher scale for acquiring such a degree/diploma/Master Degree through correspondence course does not arise."
In all the writ petitions the validity of the aforesaid G.O. No. 904-SE(Secy) dt. 19.12.94 has been challenged.
(2.)In C.O. 1622(W)/96 (Kalidas Gangopadhyay & Ors. v. State of W.B.) there are seven writ petitioners. Out of those seven writ petitioners, the petitioners Nos. 1,5,6 and 7 are working as Assistant teachers in schools and the petitioners No. 3 is working as Teacher-in-change in a school. The petitioner No.2 is working as a clerk in a school. The petitioner No.4 is unemployed. The petitioner No.3 has appeared in M.A. (English) final examination of the Himachal Pradesh University through its correspondence course and all the other six writ petitioners also improved their qualification by passing M.A./M.Sc (Maths) examination of the said University through its correspondence course. By reason of improving their qualification by obtaining M.A./M.Sc (Maths) degree from a recognised University the concerned writ petitioners serving as teachers in schools are entitled to enhanced scale of pay, namely, the post graduate scale, but they are not being given or will not be given the said scale because of the issuance of the impugned G.O. No. 9O4 SE(Secy) dt. 19.12.94. The petitioner No.2, who is serving as a clerk in a school, after obtaining M.A. degree in English from the Himachal Pradesh University through its correspondence course got his name enrolled as a post graduate candidate in the Employment Exchange and on two occasion his name, on being sponsored by the Employment Exchange, was forwarded by the District Inspector of Schools (Secondary Education) Jalpaiguri for participation in the interview for the post of Assistant Teacher in English on the basis of his post graduate qualification of the M.A. degree obtained by him from the Himachal Pradesh University through its correspondence course. He however now apprehend that his name will not be forwarded any more by the D.I. of Schools for such post because of the existence of the said G.O. dated 19.12.94. His grievance is that while the Directorate of Employment, Government of W. Bengal recognised his post graduate qualification of M.A. Degree from H.P. University and even the D.I. also forwarded his name on two occasions by recognising such qualification, the Education Department of the Government of W. Bengal cannot now capriciously derecognise his such qualification. The petitioner No.4 who is an unemployed person obtained B.Sc (Honours in Maths) Degree from the North Bengal University and then obtained M.Sc (Maths) degree from Himachal Pradesh University through its correspondence course. He was then admitted to B.Ed, course in A.C. Training College, Jalpaiguri under the North Bengal University where admission to B.Ed, course for fresher candidates is restricted to post graduate degree holders only and that is why he had to obtain migration certificate from Himachal Pradesh University for prosecuting the B.Ed course under North Bengal University. His contention is that when his post graduate degree obtained from Himachal Pradesh University has been accepted as a recognised degree for admission to the B.Ed, course under the North Bengal University, it is wholly arbitrary on the part of the Education (School) Department of the Government of West Bengal to issue the impugned G.O. No. 904-SE (Secy) dt. 19.12.94 denying recognition to such degree. The contention, I must say, is wholly Justified for reasons discussed latter.
(3.)In C.O. 14572(W}/95 (Ajai Kr. Rai & Anr. v. State of W.B.) there are two writ petitioners. Both of them are serving as Assistant teacher in a school. The petitioner No.1 while so serving in the school obtained M.A. degree in History from the Himachal Pradesh University through its correspondence course and the petitioner No. 2 obtained M.A. degree in Hindi from the said University. They prosecuted the course with the permission of the Managing Committee of the school. After obtaining M.A. degree from the Himachal Pradesh University both the petitioners applied for post graduate scale of pay and the District Inspector of Schools released pay to them in such higher scale in recognition of the post graduate qualification obtained by them from Himachal Pradesh University. Subsequently however the said benefit of higher scale for higher qualification as sanctioned earlier, was withdrawn by the D.I. of Schools in view of the Government order No. 904-SE dt. 19.12.94. The petitioners are aggrieved by withdrawal of recognition of their M.A. degree and cancellation of the benefit of higher scale for higher qualification which they were already enjoying on the basis of earlier order of the D.I. The State respondents were given opportunity to affirm affidavit-in-opposition but no affidavit was filed. However the record was produced.
;


Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.