Research › Search › Judgment

Calcutta High Court · body

2010 DIGILAW 1001 (CAL)

St. Joseph's College v. UNION OF INDIA

2010-08-17

J.K.BISWAS

body2010
JUDGMENT 1. THE petitioner in this art.226 petition dated May 17, 2010 is questioning an undated decision (at p.38) of the District Magistrate and District Election Officer, Darjeeling disposing of a representation of the Institute. The decision has been given in compliance with an order of this Court dated February 25, 2009 in W.P.No.931(W) of 2009. By the order the authority concerned was directed to consider the Institute's representation. 2. IN the impugned decision the District Magistrate and District Election Officer, Darjeeling has recorded the terms and conditions on which the Institute and the District Administration allegedly agreed. Questioning the correctness of the agreed terms and conditions, the Institute submitted a letter dated March 26, 2010 (at p.39). The District Magistrate and District Election Officer, Darjeeling did not give any attention to the letter. In my opinion, the District Magistrate and District Election Officer, Darjeeling was under an obligation to recall his decision once correctness of the terms and conditions stated to have been agreed by the parties was questioned by the Institute without any delay. 3. IT is not that the terms and conditions were reduced to writing and signed by the parties. The District Magistrate and District Election Officer, Darjeeling did not hear the Institute that was curiously heard by the Additional District Magistrate (General) as a representative of the District Magistrate. Under the circumstances, it is not know on what basis the District Magistrate and District Election Officer gave the decision recording the agreed terms and conditions. In view of the principle stated in Govt. of A.P. v. Gudepa Sailoo and Ors., (2000) 4 SCC 625 the District Magistrate required to give the decision was required to hear the Institute. 4. I think it will be appropriate to set aside the impugned decision and direct the District Magistrate and District Election Officer, Darjeeling to decide the matter afresh. For these reasons, I dispose of the petition ordering as follows. The impugned decision (at p.38) is hereby set aside. The District Magistrate and District Election Officer, Darjeeling is directed to hear all concerned including the Institute and give a fresh decision dealing with the Institute's grievances. The Institute will be free to submit a detailed representation stating its grievances. The fresh decision shall be given in the light of the decision in Election Commission of India v. St. The District Magistrate and District Election Officer, Darjeeling is directed to hear all concerned including the Institute and give a fresh decision dealing with the Institute's grievances. The Institute will be free to submit a detailed representation stating its grievances. The fresh decision shall be given in the light of the decision in Election Commission of India v. St. Mary's School and Ors., (2008) 2 SCC 390 , within six weeks from the date of communication of this order; it shall be communicated to all concerned without any delay. No costs.