Samapti Chatterjee, J. - (1.) The following issues to be determined in the present writ petition are :- (i) Whether the District Inspector of School (P.E.) Uttar Dinajpur , respondent no.5 herein travelled beyond his jurisdiction in issuing the impugned order dated 10th April, 2017 thereby directing the petitioner school to close the same in terms of Memo No.323-SE (Law) dated 15th March, 2012; (ii) Whether the State Level Committee, the respondent no.3 herein is the competent authority to grant or refuse 'No Objection Certificate' (NOC) under West Bengal Right of Children to Free and Compulsory Education Act, 2009 and the Rules framed thereunder;
(2.) The fact of the case in a nutshell is as follows :- The petitioner trust runs a school called "Sarada Shishu Teertha", at Village-Karandighi, District-Uttar Dinajpur. The school has been running prior to the West Bengal Right of |Children to Free and Compulsory Education Rules, coming into force in March, 2012. In compliance of Rules 10 (1) and (2) of the said Rules, the school applied for 'No. Objection Certificate' to the District Inspector of Schools (P.E.) Uttar Dinajpur being the respondent no.5. The respondent no.5 has issued a memo dated 10th April, 2017 holding that the said school is not fit for recommendation for No Objection Certificate from the Competent authority and since the school cannot function without obtaining such a certificate of recognition from the Competent Authority under Section 18 (1) of the RTE Act, 2009, the school must close down with immediate effect. Assailing the impugned order dated 10th April, 2017 issued by the District Inspector of Schools (P.E) Uttar Dinajpur the petitioner school filed the present writ petition. This Court on 12th May, 2017 after being prima facie satisfied has been pleased to grant interim protection thereby staying the portion of the order dated 10th April, 2017. This Court also directed the parties to file affidavit-in-opposition and affidavit-in-reply. Accordingly the respondent no.1 filed the affidavit-in-opposition and the petitioner school also filed affidavit-in-reply. Submissions of the Learned Advocates
(3.) Mr. Subir Sanyal learned Advocate appearing for the school authority the petitioner herein, strongly argued that the concerned District Inspector of Schools has no authority to pass the impugned order of closer of the said school.;