JUDGMENT 1. THE Judgment of the Court was as follows : Refusal to accord permission for recruitment to the Post of Librarian of the Appellant School persuaded it to approach the Writ Court. Prayer for seeking permission to fill up the said post by the concerned District Inspector was allowed by the learned Single Judge. He also directed the "District Inspector of Schools (SE). 24 Paraanas South to refer the vacancy to the School Service Commission for initiating necessary recruitment process to fill up the post of Librarian in the concerned school." 2. ON a limited scope this Appeal has been preferred by the Managing Committee of the said School on the ground that in view of the fact that School Service Commission Act, 2008 came into effect on 14/01/ 2009 having no retrospective effect whereas the post fell vacant on 28/11/ 2007 the recruitment ought to have been conducted at the behest of the Appellant. To buttress his point Shri Sarwar Jahan with Shri Sk. Nayeemul Haque for the Appellant has submitted that even though the Order passed by the learned Single Judge brought some initial cheers on account of the permission for filling up the post of Librarian, which was hitherto not given by the concerned District Inspector of Schools but the rider that the post would be required to be filled up by the School Service Commission, has adversely affect the right of the Managing Committee. 3. SEEKING to set aside that portion of the Order of the learned Trial Judge, Shri Sarwar Jahan has invited our attention to a Division Bench decision of this Court in The Secretary of the Managing Committee, Kalinagar Girls' High School, Nadia v. Archana Ghosh (Saha) and Ors. reported in (2010)3 Cal LT (HC) 192 : (2010)4 WBLR (Cal) 381. 4. RELYING on the said Division Bench decision of The Secretary of the Managing Committee, Kalinagar Girls' High School, Nadia v. Archana Ghosh (Saha) and Ors. (supra) Shri Sarwar Jahan submitted that it is no longer res integra that when the vacancy arises, Rules guiding recruitment procedure should be followed and not the one that has come into effect subsequently. Controverting the stand taken by Shri Sarwar Jahan Khwaja Javed Yusuf, learned Junior Government Advocate has submitted, that cannot be so. (supra) Shri Sarwar Jahan submitted that it is no longer res integra that when the vacancy arises, Rules guiding recruitment procedure should be followed and not the one that has come into effect subsequently. Controverting the stand taken by Shri Sarwar Jahan Khwaja Javed Yusuf, learned Junior Government Advocate has submitted, that cannot be so. He was of the view that once the West Bengal School Service Commission (Amendment) Act, 2008 had come into effect, there was no question of any application of the earlier Rules, which stood nugated by the operation of the new Rules. 5. SHRI Yusuf referred to the decision of Supreme Court in Madan Mohan Sharma and Anr. v. State of Rajasthan and Ors., (2008)3 SCC 724 rendered by A.K. Mathur and Altamas Kabir, JJ.(As the Learned Chief Justices then were) to show that the subsequent Rules in respect of a recruitment procedure, which came into effect, cannot be made retrospective. 6. HE also referred to the decision of First Bench in Snehansu Jas v. State of West Bengal and Ors., (2001)2 Cal LJ 558 : 2002 WBLR (Cal) 36 to illustrate his submission. Summing up, Shri Yusuf distinguished the Division Bench decision of The Secretary of the Managing Committee, Kalinagar Girls' High School, Nadia v. Archana Ghosh (Saha) and Ors. (supra) and submitted that it cannot hold good in the fact situation of the present case. 7. WE have carefully assessed the situation. Even though as a subsequent Division Bench, Judicial decorum postulates that we trail the preceding decision rendered by an earlier Division Bench - we feel that we have to walk a extra mile within the tenets of Judicial discipline and that would make all the difference. 8. QUESTION that arises for our consideration is whether the West Bengal School Service Commission Rules can be applied for filling up the vacancy of the post of Librarian in the Appellant's school. Law by now is quite well settled that once the recruitment process has been set on motion and the post being advertised, interview having been held and developments taking place then only for the limited purpose the existing Rules prevalent at the relevant point of time would be applicable. Otherwise not. 9. POSITION here is very simple. Leave alone the post being sanctioned, there was no culmination of the recruitment process. Otherwise not. 9. POSITION here is very simple. Leave alone the post being sanctioned, there was no culmination of the recruitment process. Failure on the part of the District Inspector of Schools to accord permission, prompted the Appellant to move the Writ Court. As such, Judicial notice can be taken of the fact that nothing, as yet, has taken place impinging on the recruitment procedure relating to appointment of the Librarian in the School of the Appellant. 10. ORDER passed by the learned Single Judge is quite demonstrative of the fact that nothing more is required to be seen. The Division Bench in The Secretary of the Managing Committee, Kalinagar Girls' High School, Nadia v. Archana Ghosh (Saha) and Ors. (supra) pushed two Elderly Division Bench decisions of Abdul Mannan Laskar v. State of West Bengal and Ors., (2000)1 Cal HN 435 and Snehansu Jas v. State of West Bengal and Ors. (supra) into the back waters on the realm of the relevant decisions of the Supreme Court discussed by them and had held that those did not have any binding precedent upon them. Academically the learned Judges of the Division Bench were right in their interpretation of Article 141. No discourse is necessary but applying our sense of Judicial incisiveness we discover that the decisions of the Hon'ble Apex Court deals with the promotional aspect whereas the question before us relates to a fresh recruitment procedure relying on the Rules, which have hitherto been superseded. Furthermore, no ground work has also been made out within the ambit of the hitherto scrapped Rules so as to give the Appellant any strength to let his claim for appointment of the post in question. 11. THAT apart the candidate, if at all, could have some say, we failed to understand how the Managing Committee, can at all, be prejudiced by way of simply change of the existing procedure governing the mode of appointment. 12. EASILY, the impact, if any, of the Division Bench decision in The Secretary of the Managing Committee, Kalinagar Girls' High School, Nadia v. Archand Ghosh (Saha) and Ors. (supra) mellows down and would not be deemed to be an obiter dictam on the proposition advanced by Shri Sarwar Jahan. To put it more succinctly, the said Division Bench in The Secretary of the Managing Committee, Kalinagar Girls High School, Nadia v. Archana Ghosh (Saha) and Ors. (supra) mellows down and would not be deemed to be an obiter dictam on the proposition advanced by Shri Sarwar Jahan. To put it more succinctly, the said Division Bench in The Secretary of the Managing Committee, Kalinagar Girls High School, Nadia v. Archana Ghosh (Saha) and Ors. (supra) has missed the crux of the issue and the decision returned thereunder, is virtually does not impinge on the issue in question having no effect, leave alone any binding effect by way of a proper Judicial pronouncement in connection with a fact in issue. 13. WE are very much emboldened to take recourse to a very fascinating piece of an unreported decision rendered Shri Dipankar Datta, J. in W.P. No. 16383(W) of 2010, Sri Ashoke Sawoo v. State of West Bengal and Ors. His Lordship has forensically dealt with the situation in his own inimitable way and has held that simply forum of recruitment has been altered and not the methodology. His Lordship has also discussed the philosophy behind enactment of the Rule and concluded that in no way the Managing Committee can be said to be deprived in any way in respect of the change brought into the Rules, as they do not stand to be affected by the same. 14. IN the gossamer white of the impeccable finding in the unreported decision of W.P. No. 16383(W) of 2010, Sri Ashoke Saiuoov. State of West Bengal and Ors. (supra) ; we feel we have very little task left before us and have simply to say amen by taking the Appeal to its logical conclusion and say dismissed. No Order as to costs.