Sahina Khatun And Others vs The State Of West Bengal And Others
2021 Latest Caselaw 5217 Cal

28th September, 2021
    (D/L No.13)
      (SKB)

                                           W.P.A.9839 of 2021
                                         (Via Video Conference)

                                        Sahina Khatun and others
                                                 Versus
                                   The State of West Bengal and others


                                   Mr. Kamalesh Bhattacharya,
                                   Ms. Pampa Dey (Dhabal
                                                      ... for the petitioners.

                                   Mr. Tapan Kumar Mukherjee,
                                   Ms. Sahili Mukherjee
                                                          ... for the State.



                            Affidavit of service filed in Court today is taken on

                       record.

                            The writ petitioners have claimed to have been

                       duly appointed in the posts of Assistant Teacher and

                       non-teaching staff in Akandadanga High Madrasah,

                       District-Nadia, by the concerned authorities of the said

                       Madrasah following the Rules as contained in the

                       Notification dated 3rd March, 2016.

                            The grievance voiced on behalf of the writ

                       petitioners by Mr. Kamalesh Bhattacharya, learned

                       advocate is that in spite of appointment of the writ

                       petitioners in the said posts vide appointment letters at

                       pages 61 to 63 of the writ petition, till date the

                       approval of appointment has not been accorded by the

                       District Inspector of Schools (SE), Nadia, being the

                       respondent no.5. One letter has been written by the

writ petitioners dated 15th January, 2021 at page 84 of

the writ petition, addressed to the concerned

respondent authorities including the Director of

Madrasah Education, West Bengal, for taking

necessary steps on the claim of the writ petitioners for

approval of appointment. It has been submitted on

behalf of the writ petitioners that since issue of

approval of the writ petitioners is pending before the

concerned authorities, the same needs to be finally

decided.

Mr. Tapan Kumar Mukherjee, learned Additional

Government Pleader appears on behalf of the State

respondents and submits that for appointment of the

writ petitioners prior permission is pre-condition which

has not been issued by the appropriate authority in

favour of the said Madrasah in support of appointment

of the writ petitioner and in addition thereto, it has

also been submitted on behalf of the State respondents

that on maintaining staff pattern of the said Madrasah

appointments were required to be made. Mr.

Mukherjee opposes the prayer of the writ petitioners

for approval of appointment, as sought for.

Considering the rival submissions made on behalf

of the respective parties, this Court directs the Director

of Madrasah Education, West Bengal, being the

respondent no.2, to take a decision on the

representation of the writ petitioners dated 15th

January, 2021, at page 84 of the writ petition, in

accordance with law and if necessary upon placing

reliance on the relevant judgments of the Hon'ble

Supreme Court, within a period of twelve weeks from

the date of communication of this order after granting

opportunity of hearing to the writ petitioners,

concerned Madrasah authorities as well as District

Inspector of Schools (S.E.), Nadia or his authorised

representative. Decision to be taken in terms of this

order, to be communicated to the writ petitioners

within a period of two weeks thereafter.

However, it is made clear that if the decision goes

in favour of the writ petitioners, consequential steps to

be taken for appointment of the writ petitioners in the

said posts by the concerned respondent authorities

and in the event of rejection of the prayer of the writ

petitioners by the concerned authority, adequate

reasons need to be given in support of such rejection.

Accordingly, the writ petition stands disposed of

without any order as to costs.

All parties to act on the server copy of this order

downloaded from the official website of this Hon'ble

Court.

Urgent photostat certified copy of this order, if

applied for, is to be given to the parties upon

compliance with the necessary formalities.

(Saugata Bhattacharyya, J.)