Research › Search › Judgment

Calcutta High Court · body

2006 DIGILAW 284 (CAL)

SUCHARITA GHOSH v. STATE OF WEST BENGAL

2006-05-10

JAYANTA KUMAR BISWAS

body2006
Jayanta Kumar Biswas, JJ. ( 1 ) THE writ petitioner alleges inaction on the part of the Chairman of the school service commission in that her request for transferring her to a school close to her residence was not considered by the commission. ( 2 ) SHE took the examination conducted by the school service commission for selecting candidates for appointment as assistant teacher. She was successful, and according to her merit position, the school service commission by its order dated March 12th, 2005 recommended her to Laudaha k. T. B Institution, Burdwan. By letter dated March 24th, 2005 the school authority offered her appointment. She accepted the offer and joined the school on April 1 st, 2005. Thereafter she submitted a representation dated January 12th, 2006 requesting the school service commission to transfer her to a school close to her residence. She made a further representation dated April 3rd, 2006. Since no attention was given to her representations, alleging inaction she has taken out the present writ petition. ( 3 ) COUNSEL submits that although there is no provision casting any obligation on the school service commission to consider the petitioner's request for transferring her to a school close to her residence, in view of the Single bench decision of this Court in Shelly Jaffri Latif v. State of West Bengal and ors. , reported at (2004)2 Cal LJ (Cal) 26 : (2004)2 WBLR (Cal) 258, the commission was under an obligation to consider the application. He submits that in view of provision in Article 15 (3) of the Constitution of India the state was under an obligation to make appropriate legislation for ameliorating the service conditions of women teachers like the petitioner. His argument is that being a woman it is almost impossible on the part of the petitioner to attend the school alter covering a distance of around 105 Km. from her place of residence. He prays For an order directing the commission to give a reasoned decision after considering the application. ( 4 ) I feel sorry that I am unable to give any relief to the petitioner. I am unable to agree with her Counsel that in view of the decision cited to me the commission was under an obligation to give a decision in her application. ( 4 ) I feel sorry that I am unable to give any relief to the petitioner. I am unable to agree with her Counsel that in view of the decision cited to me the commission was under an obligation to give a decision in her application. That decision was given on the facts of that case, and moreover, as conceded by her Counsel, operation of that decision was stayed by the Division Bench by order made in the appeal preferred by the aggrieved parties. Here the admitted position is that no provision of law entitles the petitioner to apply for her transfer to a school close to her residence. The further admitted position is that there is no provision of law that casts any statutory duty or obligation on the school service commission to give a decision in her representations seeking transfer. ( 5 ) ACCORDING to provisions of the statute constituting the school service commission, it is only to select the candidates for appointment as teacher, and to recommend the selected candidates according to their respective merit position in the panel concerned. Thereafter the school authority to which the candidate is recommended is to take steps for giving appointment. Once the offer made by the school is accepted by the recommended candidate, such candidate becomes a member of the teaching staff of that particular school. Recommendation of the commission and the merit position of the candidate can no longer exist, and they simply merge with the appointment order given by the school authority as the statutory appointing authority. The appointment in such a case is a school specific appointment. The State is not the employer of the teacher; it is not the transferring authority of the teacher either. A teacher appointed through the process is not entitled to seek transfer to any other school. The school appointing the teacher does not have any power either to transfer the teacher to any other school. ( 6 ) IN view of these admitted factual and legal positions, I do not see how the allegation of inaction can be made against the school service commission. It was under no obligation, since it possessed no power for the purpose, to consider the petitioner's application for recommending her for transfer to a school close to her residence. ( 6 ) IN view of these admitted factual and legal positions, I do not see how the allegation of inaction can be made against the school service commission. It was under no obligation, since it possessed no power for the purpose, to consider the petitioner's application for recommending her for transfer to a school close to her residence. The power of the commission to recommend extinguished the moment it exercised the power recommending the petitioner to the school that she joined. Hence I am unable to make any order directing the commission to consider the petitioner's application. Such a useless order cannot be made in exercise of writ powers. For these reasons the writ petition is dismissed. There shall be no order for costs.