Debangsu Basak, J. - (1.) The petitioner assails a memo dated January 3, 2014 issued by the Deputy Secretary (Administration)-in-charge of the West Bengal Board of Secondary Education, informing the petitioner of the decision of the Appeal Committee of the Board taken in its meeting held on December 6, 2013. The Appeal Committee of the West Bengal Board of Secondary Education it its meeting held on December 6, 2013 rejected the claims of the petitioner with regard to his retrenchment.
(2.) Learned Advocate appearing for the petitioner submits that, the petitioner was retrenched on April 30, 2013. Such order is bad in law and in fact. The order of retrenchment being bad, the petitioner appealed to the Appeals Committee of the West Bengal Board of Secondary Education. The Appeal Committee decided the issue against the petitioner without taking into consideration the relevant issues. He relies upon (M/s. Parry Company Limited v. P.C. Pal, 1970 AIR(SC) 1334) and (Gammon India Limited v. Niranjan Dass, 1983 LABIC 1865) in support of his contentions.
(3.) Learned Advocate appearing for the school authorities submits that, the writ petition is not maintainable. A writ does not lie against a private educational institution. In support of such contention, he relies upon (State of Uttar Pradesh & Anr. v. Uttar Pradesh Rajya Khanij Vikas Nigam Sangharsh Samiti & Ors., 2008 12 SCC 675), an order dated July 26, 2016 passed by the Supreme Court in Civil Appeal No. 7030 of 2016 (Committee of Management, La Martiniere College, Lucknow v. Vatsal Gupta & Ors.) and (Pradeep Kumar Biswas v. Indian Institute of Chemical Biology & Ors., 2002 5 SCC 111). He contends that, there are disputed questions of fact involved. The services of the petitioner becoming surplus the educational institution retrenched the petitioner. The petitioner was paid all benefits for retrenchment. The issue as to whether the retrenchment was bad in law or in fact is a mixed question of fact and law which needs to be adjudicated by an appropriate forum. According to him, the petitioner has to approach the Industrial Tribunal for relief.;