Tapabrata Chakraborty, J. - (1.) Affidavit of service and the supplementary affidavit filed by the petitioner be kept on record. Mr. Mishra, learned advocate appearing for the petitioner submits that the petitioner was appointed as the Teacher-in-Charge of Hat Chapra King Edward High School (Higher Secondary) (in short, the said school) by a letter dated 19th May, 2016. Suddenly, without any prior notice and without granting any opportunity of hearing to the petitioner, the respondent no. 8 was illegally appointed as the Headmaster of the said school and by a letter dated 4th January, 2018 the respondent no. 6 requested the petitioner to hand over charge to the said respondent no. 8. In the said letter it was also stated that the governing body of the founder body in its meeting held on 13th December, 2017 has appointed the respondent no. 8 as the Headmaster of the said school.
(2.) According to Mr. Mishra, the petitioner fulfils the suitability criteria for being appointed to the post of Headmaster. In appreciation of such qualification, the school authorities themselves appointed him as a Teacher-in-Charge and prior to ascertainment of comparative suitability among the petitioner and the respondent no. 8, the said school authorities appointed the respondent no. 8 as the Headmaster. Such action, according to him, is in violation of the provisions of clauses 10(i) and 10(ii) of the Guidelines for Recruitment in Permanent and Temporary Vacancies of Christian Minority and Aided Schools (in short, the said Guidelines).
(3.) Per contra Mr. Baid, learned advocate appearing for the respondent nos. 4-8 submits that if the candidate to be appointed to the post of Headmaster is a member of the religious/linguistic minority to which the school belongs he can be appointed directly by the President of founder body without following the normal procedure as laid down under Rule 4 of the notification dated 3rd February, 2016. According to him there is no provision under the said government notification dated 13th February, 2016 and the said guidelines that for filling up the said post in a minority institution, the authorities have to decide comparative suitability among the candidates. The respondent no. 8 is within the age limit and has the appropriate qualification and is also a member of the religious minority to which the school belongs.;