Research › Search › Judgment

Calcutta High Court · body

2016 DIGILAW 866 (CAL)

Pampa Halder v. State of West Bengal

2016-11-10

SAHIDULLAH MUNSHI

body2016
JUDGMENT : 1. Affidavit of service, filed in Court today, be taken on record. 2. The petitioner claims to have been engaged as a para teacher at Muldia Chaitanyapur Deshgourab Vidyamandir on 4th October, 2010. The petitioner claims that although as per government norms she was required to be registered online for D.El.Ed., the same was refused for the reason that she was not continuing as a para teacher. Challenging denial of such online registration, the petitioner moved a writ petitioner being W.P. 111 (W) of 2016 which was disposed of by a learned Single Bench of this Court on 11th January, 2016 granting liberty to the petitioner to make a comprehensive representation before the concerned authority praying for grant of online registration. It was mentioned in the said Order that in the event letter of engagement in favour of the petitioner was granted by the concerned respondent namely the District Project Officer, Sarba Siksha Mission, South 24-Parganas, the petitioner could avail herself of online registration to the course under the West Bengal Board of Secondary Education by 18th January 2016. After the said order was passed the concerned authority namely, the District Project Officer, Sarba Siksha Mission, South 24-Parganas passed the impugned Order dated 4th March, 2016 rejecting the petitioner’s prayer for online registration for D.El.Ed. While passing the impugned order the said Project Officer mentioned that the petitioner was not considered for continuation as a para teacher in the said school. Although, it is the claim of the petitioner that she was engaged in 2010 and there was no reason for discontinuation. However, an averment has been made in paragraph 24 of the writ petition that all on a sudden, on August 10, 2016 the petitioner has been forced to leave the school premises. 3. Learned Counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that it is the decision of the Central Government that para teacher once engaged will continue till expiry of 60 years of age. 4. Mr. Halder, learned Counsel appearing for the State submits that in view of the Circular issued by the State Government on 9th June, 2010 the petitioner cannot claim to continue as a para teacher in the school. 4. Mr. Halder, learned Counsel appearing for the State submits that in view of the Circular issued by the State Government on 9th June, 2010 the petitioner cannot claim to continue as a para teacher in the school. However, subsequent to the said Circular another Circular was issued by the Education Department, Government of West Bengal on 22nd July, 2010 (Annexure P-3 to this writ petition) which shows that all para teachers duly engaged previously will continue to be engaged till they attain 60 years of age. From the averments of the writ petition and the documents relied upon by the petitioner it does not appear that the petitioner was engaged as para teacher after 22nd July, 2010. If the petitioner was engaged in 2010 then she will get the benefit of the Circular to continue till attaining the age of 60 years. Therefore, the impugned order which has been passed by the said Project Officer is contradictory to the aforesaid Circular dated 22nd July, 2010. Even the impugned order appears to be in contradiction with the earlier circular of the government order issued on 9th June, 2010. Paragraph 2 of the said Memo. specifically mentioned that persons will remain engaged till they attain 60 years of age. 5. Having heard the parties and having considered the materials and the aforesaid circular there can be no reason for the authority to hold that the petitioner should be discontinued from her service once she was duly engaged as a para teacher particularly when it is mentioned in those circulars that fresh renewal is not necessary. In that view of the matter, the order impugned passed by the said Project Officer is set aside and the said authority is directed to pass a fresh reasoned order after giving an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner and the petitioner will be entitled to rely on documents in favour of her claim as a para teacher within a period of four weeks from the date of communication of this order after taking into consideration of the above mentioned circulars and also to take a decision whether the petitioner was duly engaged on 13th May, 2010 as a para teacher of the school. In the event it is found that she was duly engaged as a para teacher, she will be allowed online registration without any delay. In the event it is found that she was duly engaged as a para teacher, she will be allowed online registration without any delay. The said respondent is also directed to communicate his decision to the petitioner at an early date. 6. With the above direction, the writ petition is disposed of.