Calcutta High Court (Appellete Side)
Putul Chattaraj & Ors vs The State Of West Bengal & Ors on 4 October, 2024
Author: Jay Sengupta
Bench: Jay Sengupta
HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA
CONSTITUTIONAL WRIT JURISDICTION
APPELLATE SIDE
Present:
THE HON'BLE JUSTICE JAY SENGUPTA
WPA 23810 of 2024
Putul Chattaraj & Ors.
Versus
The State of West Bengal & Ors.
For the petitioners : Mr. Bidhan Biswas
For the State : Mr. Bhaskar Prasad Vaisya ld.AGP.,
Mr. Sagnik Chatterjee.
For the respondent no.4 : Mr. Md. Sarwar Jahan
Ms. Mousumi Mitra
Ms. Tapati Sarkar
Heard on : 04.10.2024
Judgment on : 04.10.2024
JAY SENGUPTA, J:
1. Affidavit of service filed on behalf of the petitioners is taken on record.
2. Petitioners have come up with the present writ petition claiming to be
treated as Sahayak/Sahayika in Sishu Shiksha Kendra instead of para teacher.
3. It has been submitted by the learned advocate representing the petitioners
that in terms of notification dated 18th December, 2019 passed by the School
Education Department, Government of West Bengal they exercised option to
function as para teachers not as Sahayak/Sahayika. However, petitioners have
subsequently found that for a considerable period of time scheme was not
introduced and ultimately vide memorandum dated 29th August, 2024 issued by
the Additional Secretary to the Government of West Bengal, Department of School
Education benefit of EPF Scheme is only extended from 1st April, 2024 in the
event Sahayak/Sahayika of Sishu Shiksha Kendras opted for engagement upto
the age of 60 years. It is submitted by the learned advocate representing the
petitioners that such scheme which has been introduced vide memorandum dated
29th August, 2024 is found to be not beneficial to them since same has been
introduced with effect from 1st April, 2024 and petitioners want to be treated as
Sahayak/Sahayika without giving effect to the options which they have exercised.
In support of such contention reliance is placed on an order dated 16th March,
2023 passed by a coordinate Bench on a writ petition being WPA 4525 of 2023
(Bidhan Chandra Naskar & Ors. Vs. The State of West Bengal & Ors.) Learned
counsel for the petitioners further contends that they had not filled up any form in
respect of the notification dated 04.09.2024. Reliance is placed on an order
passed by a Co-ordinate Bench on 25.09.2024 in WPA 22612 of 2024.
4. Paschim Banga Rajya Sishu Shiksha Mission (for short,PBRSSM‟) and the
State-respondents are represented by learned advocates.
5. It has been submitted specifically on behalf of PBRSSM that the situation
which was prevailing prior to issuance of memorandum dated 29th August, 2024 is
altered after 29th August, 2024. Therefore, at present petitioners have no other
choice but to come under the said memorandum dated 29th August, 2024 based
on options they have exercised. In the same breath it has also been submitted on
behalf of PBRSSM that since the benefit of EPF is extended to the
Sahayak/Sahayika with effect from 1st April, 2024 it may not be beneficial to those
Sahayak/Sahayika who have less than two years left if they are to retire at the age
of 60 years at par with para teachers.
6. Having considered the respective submissions made on behalf of the
parties this Court finds that there is memorandum dated 29th August, 2024 issued
by the Additional Secretary to the Government of West Bengal deciding to extend
benefit of EPF to Sahayak/Sahayika with effect from 1st April, 2024 which appears
to be not beneficial to the petitioners as a result whereof they are praying before
this Court for a direction to be treated as Sahayak/Sahayika not as para teachers
by not giving effect to the options which they have exercised. Similar benefit has
been extended by a coordinate Bench by passing order dated 16th March, 2023
on a writ petition being WPA 4525 of 2023 in the case of Bidhan Chandra Naskar
(Supra). Placing reliance on the ratio of Bidhan Chandra Naskar (supra) this Court
has passed several orders directing the authorities not to treat Sahayak/Sahayika
as para teachers on giving credence to the options which they have exercised.
Only difference today is issuance of memorandum dated 29th August, 2024
whereby State authority has decided to extend the benefit of EPF to the petitioners
with effect from 1st April, 2024 which is found not to be beneficial so far these
petitioners are concerned since with the benefit of EPF at the fag end of their
service tenure they have to retired at the age of 60 years instead of 65 years. If the
petitioners are treated as Sahayak/Sahayika they can function upto the age of 65
years which according to them is more beneficial than to function as para teachers
till the age of 60 years accepting the condition as stipulated in the memorandum
dated 29th August, 2024.
7. Since in the writ petitions which have been decided prior to issuance of
memorandum dated 29th August, 2024 permitting those petitioners to be treated
as Sahayak/Sahayika without giving credence to the options which they exercised
this Court finds no impediment in extending same benefit to the present
petitioners. Mere issuance of memorandum dated 29th August, 2024 should not
act as fetter so far present petitioners are concerned to be treated as
Sahayak/Sahayika without giving credence to the options which they have
exercised.
8. In view of aforesaid discussions the writ petition stands allowed directing
the concerned State authorities including PBRSSM authority to treat the
petitioners as Sahayak/Sahayika and the options which they have exercised shall
be treated as cancelled.
9. It is also clarified that in future they cannot claim the benefits as para
teachers.
10. Learned advocate representing the petitioners submits that the deficit Court
fees has been put in and in support of the same document is produced before this
court and the same is taken on record.
11. Accordingly, the writ petition stands disposed of.
12. There shall be no order as to costs.
13. Urgent photostat certified copy of this order may be supplied to the parties
expeditiously, if applied for.
(Jay Sengupta, J)
NB/11
