Research › Search › Judgment

Calcutta High Court · body

2004 DIGILAW 753 (CAL)

OLIUL ISLAM v. STATE OF WEST BENGAL

2004-12-09

JYOTIRMAY BHATTACHARYA

body2004
JYOTIRMAY BHATTACHARYA, J. ( 1 ) ADMITTEDLY, the petitioner secured third position in the panel prepared by the West Bengal Central School Service Commission under 2001 for the post of Headmaster in Singimari C. D. High School in the District of jalpaiguri. It is also an undisputed fact that the respondent Nos. 6 and 7 occupied 1st and 2nd position in the said panel respectively. ( 2 ) IT is also an admitted fact that none of the said respondent Nos. 6 and 7 accepted the offer of the school authority for appointment to the concerned post of Headmaster in the said school in spite of successive recommendation made by the concerned School Service Commission. ( 3 ) ANNEXURE P-11 to this writ petition shows that the respondent No. 6, viz. , Sribash Kumar Roy was appointed as Headmaster of Barnesh High school in the District of Jalpaiguri. The service of the said respondent was also approved by the concerned District Inspector of Schools with effect from 28. 12. 2001 vide letter of approval issued by the concerned District inspector of Schools dated 15. 01. 2002. Similarly, the appointment of the respondent No. 7, viz. , Pratul Kr. Roy as Headmaster of Moulani gaiindranath Roy High School was approved by the concerned District inspector of Schools with effect from 21. 09. 2001 vide letter of approval being Annexure 'p-12' to this writ petition issued by the District Inspector of schools on 18. 10. 2001. ( 4 ) THUS, the petitioner claimed that since both the respondent Nos. 6 and 7 declined to accept the appointment to the concerned post in Singimari c. D High School, the name of the petitioner should have been recommended by the concerned School Service Commission to the said school for appointing the petitioner as Headmaster therein. ( 5 ) IT appears from the record that on 7th October, 2002, an interim order was passed by this Court, whereby the respondents were directed to issue appointment letter to the petitioner, in the event it was found that the said two candidates, viz. . the respondent Nos. 6 and 7 were not willing to accept the offer of appointment to the concerned post. . the respondent Nos. 6 and 7 were not willing to accept the offer of appointment to the concerned post. It further appears from the record that subsequently a contempt application being CPAN No. 739 of 2003 was taken out by the petitioner therein for non-compliance of the said interim order passed by this Court. Ultimately, however, the said contempt proceeding was dropped with a recording that the interim order dated 7th October, 2002 had been complied with by the concerned respondent. ( 6 ) IT further appears from the record that the appointment of the petitioner as Headmaster in the concerned school has also been approved by the concerned District Inspector of Schools with effect from 12th september, 2003. However, it appears from the said letter of approval that such approval to the appointment of the petitioner was granted subject to the result of this writ petition. ( 7 ) IN the affidavit-in-opposition filed by the respondents, the respondent School Service Commission contended that since the School service Commission was not informed about the disinclination and/or unwillingness of the respondent Nos. 6 and 7 for joining in the said post, the said Commission could not recommend the name of the petitioner who secured third position in the said panel. The said respondent also contended in the affidavit-in-opposition that since this writ petition was moved by the petitioner after expiry of the life of the panel, the petitioner cannot get any relief in this writ petition as no appointment can be given to any person from the panel after the expiry of the life of the said panel. ( 8 ) THUS, the School Service Commission opposed the prayer of the petitioner, on the aforesaid grounds. ( 9 ) HEARD the learned Advocates of the respective parties. ( 10 ) ADMITTEDLY, the petitioner occupied the third position in the panel. It has already been indicated above that neither the respondent No. 6 nor the respondent No. 7 who occupied 1st and 2nd position in the panel, accepted the offer for appointment to the concerned post even though their names were recommended by the Commission to the concerned school authority for the said post. ( 11 ) IN such view of the matter, the petitioner who occupied the third position in the panel should have been recommended by the School Service commission for appointment of the concerned post. ( 11 ) IN such view of the matter, the petitioner who occupied the third position in the panel should have been recommended by the School Service commission for appointment of the concerned post. The petitioner cannot suffer any injury due to any communicational gap between the School service Commission and the school authorities. ( 12 ) ADMITTEDLY, the respondent Nos. 6 and 7 joined their respective schools as Headmaster therein. The appointment of the respondent Nos. 6 and 7 in the respective schools as Headmaster therein was also approved by the concerned District Inspector of Schools, If, however, due to any default on the part of the school authority and/or concerned District Inspector of Schools, the concerned Commission was not informed about the disinclination of the respondent Nos. 6 and 7 to join the concerned post, the right of the petitioner for being considered for the said post from the panel cannot be denied. The Commission cannot avoid its responsibility by simply denying the right of the petitioner on the plea that the name of the petitioner cannot be recommended after expiry of the panel, when the power of the Commission to extend the life of the panel is not unknown. ( 13 ) AS such, I find substance in the contention of the petitioner. ( 14 ) THE respondents are, therefore, directed to regularise the appointment of the petitioner and/or approval thereof as Headmaster in the said school, viz. , Singimari C. D. High School with effect from the date of his joining in the said school by extending the life of the panel, if necessary and to grant all consequential benefits attached in such appointment to the petitioner. This writ petition, thus, stands allowed. There will be, however, no order as to costs. Urgent xerox certified copy of this order, if applied for, be given to the parties, as expeditiously as possible, upon compliance with the requisite formalities.