Calcutta High Court (Appellete Side)
Sri Mangal Mandi & Ors vs The State Of West Bengal & Ors on 16 September, 2022
18 16.09.2022
Ct.15
W.P.A. 2281 of 2019
rkd
(IA NO: CAN 1 of 2019(Old No: CAN 11818 of 2019)
Sri Mangal Mandi & Ors.
-vs-
The State of West Bengal & Ors.
Mr. Subrata Ghosh,
Mr. Sayantan Hazra
....for the petitioners.
Mr. Tapan Kuma Mukherjee,
Mr. Pinaki Bhattacharyya
....for the State.
This writ petition is presented, inter alia,
challenging the decision of the Secretary,
Government of West Bengal dated 13th January,
2014 whereby prayers of the petitioners who are
members of the Managing Committee of Bora Jr.
High School, District-Paschim Medinipur
(hereinafter referred to as the "said school") and the
organising teaching and non-teaching staff of the
said school have been spurned.
By preferring this writ petition petitioners
have made a prayer for grant of financial benefit
under the Grant-in-aid Scheme as well as grant of
approval of appointment in favour of the petitioners
for the purpose of receiving salary and other
emoluments in respect of the service of the
teaching and non-teaching staff of the said school
who are working on recognition of said school as
2
Junior High with effect from 1st March, 2010. The
school as it has been submitted by the learned
advocate representing the petitioners was
recognized as IV Class Jr. High with effect from 1st
March, 2010 without financial assistance. After the
recognition being granted in favour of the said
school as aforesaid writ petition being W.P.O 187 of
2011 was preferred by the said school authority
seeking regularisation of service of the teaching and
non-teaching staff of the said school who are
working as organising staff and extending financial
assistance to the said school under Grant-in-aid
Scheme. The said writ petition was disposed of by a
coordinate Bench on 26th June, 2013 directing the
Secretary, Government of West Bengal, to consider
the prayer of the petitioners for extending financial
assistance either full or partial together with
approval of teaching and non-teaching staff within
a particular time.
Pursuant to such direction dated 26th June,
2013 the Secretary, Government of West Bengal,
School Education Department, being respondent
no.1, passed a reasoned order as contained in
memo dated 13th January, 2014 which has been
questioned in the present writ petition with the
prayer for extending the benefit of financial
assistance to the said school as well as approval of
appointment in favour of the teaching and non-
teaching staff.
The learned advocate representing the
petitioners has submitted that the decision of the
Hon'ble Division Bench delivered in MAT 1626 of
2017 (The District Inspector of Schools (Secondary
Education) Burdwan & Ors.-vs- Abdul Barik
Shaikh & Ors.) is not applicable in the present case
since the Hon'ble Division Bench while deciding the
right of the organising teacher to be approved was
considering the case of those organising teachers
who are working in upgraded sections (Classes IX
and X). Whereas in the present school teaching and
non-teaching staff of the said school are working in
Jr. High (Classes V to VIII) therefore the ratio of
Abdul Barik Shaikh (supra) is not applicable in the
present case and accordingly has prayed for
cancellation of the decision of the respondent no.1
and to grant approval in favour of the teaching and
non-teaching staff of the said school.
State respondents are represented by the
learned advocate who has opposed such prayer
made on behalf of the petitioners and has
submitted that after the promulgation of the West
Bengal School Service Commission Act, 1997 the
right of the organising teacher to get approval on
recognition by the said school may not be
favourably considered in view of the following
judgments:
"1. (2006) 4 CHN 513 [Manindra Nath
Sinha & ors. v. State of West
Bengal & Ors.];
2. 2008 (1) CHN 582 [State of West
Bengal & ors. v. Smritikana
Maity];
3. 2008 (1) CLJ 453 [Headmistress,
Garifa Arati Academy for Girls' v.
Gita Banik]; and
4. (2008) 1 WBLR (Cal) 229 [State of
West Bengal & ors. v. Gopal Singh
& ors.]."
Accordingly, it has been contended on
behalf of the State respondents that there is no
anomaly in the order of the respondent no.1 and
prayer has been made for dismissal of the writ
petition.
This Court has heard the learned advocates
representing the parties and perused the relevant
materials available on record including the decision
of the respondent no.1 as contained in memo dated
13th January, 2014.
The petitioner nos. 8 to 12 are the
organising teaching and non-teaching staff of the
said school which was recognised as IV Class Jr.
High with effect from 1st March, 2010 and
accordingly, an attempt has been made to make
out a case that on recognition of said school as IV
Class Jr. High those petitioners are entitled to get
the benefit of approval of appointment.
The right of the organising teaching and
non-teaching staff on recognition of the school to
be considered for approval in order to receive the
service benefits from State exchequer has already
been considered by the Hon'ble Division Bench in
the judgment delivered in Abdul Barik Shaikh
(supra).
While considering the issue the Hon'ble
Division Bench in the said judgment dated 6th July,
2018 on intra Court appeal being MAT 1626 of
2017 relied upon the other decisions of this Hon'ble
Court as indicated in paragraph 4 of the said
judgment and ultimately has succinctly held as
follows:
"19 Applying the law laid down here,
we hold that Manindra Nath
Sinha (Supra) having been
affirmed by the Supreme Court, all
Benches of this Court in cases
involving similar fact situation are
bound to follow the same as a
binding precedent and any
decision of a learned Judge or
Judges, which runs counter to the
dicta in Manindra Nath Sinha
(supra), Smritikana Maity (supra),
Gita Banik and Gopal Singh
(supra), is not good law."
In view of the ratio as decided in Abdul
Barik Shaikh (supra), it appears to this Court that
the issue involved in this writ petition with regard
to grant of approval in favour of the organising
teaching and non-teaching staff is no more res
integra. Accordingly, prayer of the petitioners for
approval of appointment on recognition of the said
school with effect from 1st March, 2010 stands
refused and the decision of the respondent no.1
relating to refusal to accord approval of
appointment/regularisation of the service of the
organising teaching and non-teaching staff of the
said school stands confirmed.
With regard to the financial assistance as
sought for by the petitioner nos. 1 to 7 who are
members of the Managing Committee of the said
school is required to be decided on filing affidavits.
Let affidavit-in-opposition to this writ
petition be filed within four weeks after long
ensuing Puja vacation and reply thereto, if any, be
filed within two weeks thereafter.
The writ petitioners shall be at liberty to
mention the matter before the appropriate Bench
for early hearing after the time fixed as aforesaid for
exchanging affidavits is over.
The application being CAN 11818 of 2019 is
taken out by the petitioners seeking certain
corrections and one of these corrections is adding
name of one Ujjal Bisai (Peon) after petitioner no.12
in the array of the writ petitioners in the cause title.
Since I have refused the prayer of the petitioner
nos. 8 to 12 for regularisation insertion of name of
said Ujjal Bisai (Peon) by allowing this application
is not warranted and accordingly, the said
application being CAN 11818 of 2019 stands
dismissed.
(Saugata Bhattacharyya, J.)
