MD. ABU NASIM BAIDYA Vs. COMMISSIONER OF WEST BENGAL
LAWS(CAL)-2019-2-159
HIGH COURT OF CALCUTTA
Decided on February 15,2019

Md. Abu Nasim Baidya Appellant
VERSUS
Commissioner Of West Bengal Respondents

JUDGEMENT

Moushumi Bhattacharya,J. - (1.) The writ petitioner is aggrieved by an order passed by the Commissioner of School Education, West Bengal, being the respondent no.2 herein, by which the case of considering the writ petitioner for the post of Assistant Headmaster (AHM) in Bhaslia Sowlatia High School (H.S.), Deganga, North 24-Parganas, was rejected and the school authority was requested to recast the panel for AHM. The impugned order was passed pursuant to a direction dated 31st July, 2018 passed by this Court in W.P. No.9460(W) of 2018, the operative part of which is set out below: "Accordingly, I dispose of the writ petition and direct that the Commissioner of School Education shall consider and dispose of the representation (at p.24) of the writ petitioner dated April 4, 2017 in accordance with law by passing a reasoned decision after giving the petitioner and the non-State respondent and others, which the authority thinks fit and proper, due opportunity of hearing within a period of four weeks from the date of communication of this order."
(2.) In coming to the impugned order, the Commissioner took into account the Memo No.1628-GA dated 10th July, 2002 read with Memo No.1353-GA dated 21st June, 2012 which according to the Commissioner prevailed at the time of interview of the writ petitioner.
(3.) Learned Counsel for the writ petitioner submits that his client secured the highest marks in the panel prepared by the school, which was then duly forwarded to the District Inspector of Schools (SE), North 24-Parganas. However, since the District Inspector did not decide within a reasonable period of time, the writ petitioner was compelled to approach this Court by way of filing a writ petition being W.P. 9460(W) of 2018 wherein this Court decided that the District Inspector alone could not take any effective decision for deciding the issue, since the Commissioner was superior to the District Inspector. The Commissioner was, accordingly, given the responsibility of disposing of the matter as set out above.;


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