Research › Search › Judgment

Calcutta High Court · body

2000 DIGILAW 581 (CAL)

Abu Bhakkar Baidya v. State of West Bengal

2000-11-27

Ashok Kumar Mathur, Ronojit Kumar Mitra

body2000
JUDGMENT Ashok Kumar Mathur, This is an appeal directed against the order dated 21st April, 1998 passed by the learned Single Judge whereby he has held that B.A. Examination in one subject cannot be treated as equivalent to the B.A. Degree in combination in regard to appointment of teachers in Arabic. 2. The brief facts which are necessary for disposal of the appeal are that a petition was filed before this Court (W.P. No. 13100 of 1997 decided on 8.8.97) seeking a direction against the District Inspector of Schools to instruct the School Authorities to recast the panel enclosing the name of the persons according to marks obtained by them in interview bearing qualification conformed into the same laid down for the post. This Court by the aforesaid order directed the Director of School Education to hear the parties and to decide whether panel was properly cast or not. The Director of School Education by his order dated 22.9.97 disposed of the matter and held that a candidate should have language paper in three years degree course i.e. in B.A. Aggrieved against this order the present writ petition was filed by the petitioner. The petitioner appeared in Special B.A. Examination in Arabic. It is alleged that he is also appearing in M.A. Examination in Arabic. The qualification for the post of Teacher in language group in High and Junior High Schools including Madrasas has been set forth by the Government of West Bengal and the same was communicated to the Director of School Education by the Government of West Bengal, Education Department by its letter dated 2nd April, 1993, relevant extract whereof are as follows: "The undersigned is directed to say that it was decided by the State Government in the Education Department vide G.O. No. 276 Edn. (S)/ 4A-5/92 dated 13th March, 1992 that henceforth selection of Assistant Teachers in any language subject in recognised High and Junior High Schools should be made only from amongst candidates who had studied the relevant language as a combination of subject of at least 300 (three hundred) marks at the graduation level. A candidate having studied a language as an additional subject less than three hundred marks shall not be deemed to be eligible for appointment as a language teacher." 3. A candidate having studied a language as an additional subject less than three hundred marks shall not be deemed to be eligible for appointment as a language teacher." 3. As per the aforesaid notification the Learned Single Judge held that the view taken by the Director of School Education that the petitioner who has taken one paper of Arabic language in his graduation that is Special B.A., he is not qualified for the post of Teacher in Arabic because he should have one of language paper in combination of subjects for graduation. The learned counsel for the appellant submitted that the view taken by the Learned Single Judge is not correct. He submitted that the incumbent has passed in Arabic language paper in Special B.A. Examination, therefore that qualification should be accepted as sufficient qualification for the post of teacher in Arabic. In this connection he has also invited our attention to a judgment of a learned Single Judge dated 30th September, 1999 in W.P. No. 10625 (W) of 1999. In this case the Learned Single Judge took the view that since the incumbent has passed Special B.A in Arabic paper that should make him eligible for appointment to the post of Assistant Teacher. Perhaps the judgment of Justice B.M. Mitra (As he then was) dated 21st April, 1998 in W.P. No. 26472 (W) of 1997 was not brought to the notice of the Learned Single Judge wherein His Lordship has held that a Special B.A. Degree in one subject cannot be treated as equivalent to the B.A. Degree in combination of papers. 4. After considering the matter we are of the opinion that as per the qualification laid down by the Government, it is more than clear, that for being qualified to the post of a language teacher, the incumbent must have a combination of papers in language of at least 300 marks in graduation level, that enables the incumbent for appointment to the post of teacher in the language. Therefore two conditions follows from the above discussion one is that the candidate should have combination of papers in language which should carry at least three hundred marks in the graduation level and the other is that simply by doing graduation in a special paper would not enable the incumbent to be qualified for the post of teacher in language. Therefore two conditions follows from the above discussion one is that the candidate should have combination of papers in language which should carry at least three hundred marks in the graduation level and the other is that simply by doing graduation in a special paper would not enable the incumbent to be qualified for the post of teacher in language. In this connection, the University of Calcutta has clarified the position that the candidates who have passed B.A. in one subject shall not be entitled to a B.A. Degree. However, he will be entitled to appear in M.A. Examination in that subject. Therefore, it is more than apparent that obtaining a graduation degree in a particular paper does not mean that he is qualified graduate in combination of papers. The idea appears to be that the incumbent should be treated to be a graduate in that particular language only as one of the combination of subjects and simply because the incumbent has passed in a special paper of 300 marks after the graduation that alone will not make him qualified for the post. The intention of the authorities are very clear and the view taken by the Director of School Education and confirmed by the Learned Single Judge in the impugned order appears to be justified and the view taken by the Learned Single Judge in W.P. No. 10625 (W) of 1999 in his order dated 30th September, 1999 is not correct. As a result of the above discussion we do not find any merit in the appeal and the same is dismissed with no order as to costs. Appeal dismissed.