TUHIN KUMAR SAMANTA Vs. STATE OF WEST BENGAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) IN this application under Article 226 of the Constitution, though seemingly it relates to the question as to who should continue to be the Headmaster of Sri Ramkrishna Sardar pith High School, Burdwan, Namely, whether the petitioner or the respondent no. 6, but behind it reflects a sad state of affairs in which our secondary education in west Bengal to-day is. In this application the petitioner challenges the order of the appeal Committee of the West Bengal Board of Secondary Education dated 31st of march, 1979. But behind the challenge there is a long history and a sad story. It is alleged that on the 14th of March, 1973 there was a notice for holding the meeting of the Managing Committee of Sri Ramkrisha Sarada Pith High School, hereinafter referred to as the said school, to be held on 22nd of March, 1973 for certain agenda to be discussed. Prior thereto there was a long correspondence between the respondent No. 6 who was then acting as the headmaster of the said school and the then secretary of the School. On the 21st of march, 1973 Title Suit No. 65 of 1973 was filed before the 2nd Munsif at Burdwan by the respondent No. 6 and an injunction order was passed restraining the members of the Managing Committee from holding the meeting on the basis of the notice dated 14th of March, 1973. Whether the members of the Managing Committee got notice of the said injection or whether the said injunction was subsequently vacated is not very clear. Nothing, however, very much depends upon it as no party made any point of that before me. The meeting, however, was alleged to have been, held on 22nd of march, 1973 and there was a resolution passed suspending the respondent No. 6 with effect from 23rd of March, 1973. On the 15th of May, 1973 respondent No. 6 preferred an appeal before the Appeal committee of the West Bengal Board of secondary Education. On the 16th of May, 1973 there was another resolution passed by the Managing Committee recommending the dismissal of the respondent No. 6 with effect from 17th of December, 1973. It is alleged that on the 16th of August, 1974 the respondent No 6 wrote a letter tendering his resignation. But on the 20th of august, 1974 the respondent No. 6 wrote a letter to the West Bengal Board of Secondary Education disputing the legality and the genuineness of the alleged letter of resignation. On 20th of August, 1974, that is to say, on the same date by a resolution of the Managing Committee the alleged resignation of the respondent No. 6 was accepted. On the 11th of December, 1974 the present petitioner claims that he was selected as the Headmaster of the said school and on 22nd of December, 1974 a letter of appointment was issued in his favour. Prior to the appointment it is not disputed that there was advertisement and interviews. On the 14th of May, 1975 the appointment of the petitioner was approved by the District Inspector of Schools. On the 9th of January; 1976 resolution was passed by the Managing Committee confirming the petitioner. On the 12th of august, 1978 an order was passed by the appeal Committee reinstating respondent no. 6 as the Headmaster. But before that order is referred to it would be necessary to refer to certain facts. Now, in the grounds of appeal which is Annexure 'x' to the affidavit of Gopal Krishna Bhattacharjee affirmed on 26th of June, 1979 and filed in opposition to the rule nisi in this case on behalf of the respondents Nos. 4, 7, 10 and 11 being the Administrator, Board of Secondary Education, Appeal Committee, West bengal Board of Secondary Education and sm. Anila Debi, Member, Appeal Committee, west Bengal Board of Secondary Education, under the heading "nature of the decision or order complained of" it was stated by the respondent No. 6 that no copy was received, salary was withheld from march 1973. Against the question whether the appeal was against the grievance of any decision of the Managing Committee it was stated that there was no decision of any managing Committee. In answer to question whether it was a case of dismissal or discharge it was stated that the said question did not arise. It was, further, stated that there should be removal of threats and check on assaults, it was alleged that he was once assaulted on 22nd of march, 1973. A copy of the letter containing the alleged grievances was annexed where the respondent No. 6 alleged that the Secretary of the school had been violating all the rules. He had wanted to hold a meeting of the managing Committee without caring to consult the respondent No. 6. He, further, alleged that the respondent No. 6 brought this to the notice of the District Inspector of School, Burdwan on 14th of March, 1973 a notice for the alleged meeting was issued. He, further, stated that at 5. 45 p. M. on 22nd of March, 1973 the Secretary with a member of unauthorized persons had assaulted the respondent No. 6 and dragged him on the road. He had, further, alleged that after sometime the school office was locked up putting new locks over the locks already there and the Secretary declared that the school would remain closed indefinitely. The school, however according to the respondent No. 6, reopened in april 1973 and he alleged that he went to school. He, further, alleged that he found that the Headmaster's almirah was removed. He came to understand from one Surja Mistri that the almirah had been broken open. He has, further, alleged that false audit accounts were placed meanwhile by the Secretary before D P I paneled auditor m/s. S. Dhar and Co, He has, further, said that he had been threatened by the secretary from entering the school. He, therefore, prayed that he should be allowed to rejoin the school. Now upon that appeal being preferred the appeal progressed before the Appeal Committee and was heard in part on different dates. One of the meetings of the Appeal Committee was held on 29th of November, 1976. In the minutes of the said meeting of the Appeal committee the respective versions of the parties were stated which included the version of the Managing Committee that the respondent No. 6 had tendered resignation on the plea that the charges against him might be withdrawn by the Managing Committee by a letter dated 16th of August, 1974. The respondent No. 6, however had denied that the letter in question was his and had stated that his signature had been "forged". The said denials and versions of the parties about the alleged termination of the service of the respondent no. 6 and the resignation letter of the respondent No. 6 dated 16th of August, 1974 were placed before the Appeal Committee. The Appeal Committee recorded in the minutes of the said meeting, inter alia, as follows :-

(2.) SUBSEQUENTLY, the Appeal Committee again met on the 20th of August, 1977. The appellant was present and on behalf of the School Secretary along with the petitioner, the Headmaster of the School was present. The parties were heard and the appeal Committee noted in the minutes as follows :-

(3.) STATEMENTS were thereafter submitted about the subsistence allowance paid or received on behalf of both the parties. The Appeal Committee, thereupon, on the 12th of August 1978 passed an order which became the subject matter of challenge in Civil Rule No. 5981 (w) of 1978 and I disposed of that matter by a judgment delivered on 9th of December, 1978. It will be necessary to refer to the said decision of mine in little detail later on. In the meantime, there was General Election of the West Bengal Assembly and change of, government and two Government orders one dated 17th of August, 1977 and another dated 19th of July 1977 were issued and it may be appropriate to refer to the said two Government orders which have been annexed to the present petition as annexure 'd'. By 17th of August 1977 circular the Joint Secretary, Government of west Bengal informed the Director of secondary Education, West Bengal regarding the subject of reinstatement of teachers and non-teaching employees of recognized non-Govt. Secondary School who were detained under M. J. S. A. or D. I. R. that government had considered their cases and had directed that teachers and other employees who were dismissed from service or placed under suspension due to their detention under M. I. SA or D. I. R, should be reinstated forthwith. It was, further, directed that status quo be maintained in respect of teachers appointed in their places pending final decision. The period of absence should be treated as period spent on leave without pay and the period of absence mentioned above should also be reckoned as qualifying for increment as a special case in relaxation of the normal rules. The District Inspectors of Schools concerned were directed to communicate the decision immediately to all Heads oil secondary Schools and if and school failed or neglected to implement this decision the case was directed, to be reported to the department as early as possible. On the 19th of August, 1977 in continuation of the last mentioned circular the Government, further, directed that the teachers and employees who were prevented from attending their schools or performing their normal duties should immediately be allowed to join their duties and they should join their respective institutions within one month from the date of that order or might; continue to remain in any alternative employment in any other educational institutions within the State. It was further, directed that the period of their absence should be reckoned as qualifying for increment as a special case, in relaxation of normal rules and teachers and other employees concerned should draw pay and allowances; as admissible from the date of resumption of duties. In this case also all the District inspectors of Schools were directed to be forthwith communicated and if there was any difficulty the matter was directed to be referred to the department. The appeal filed by the respondent no. 6 was, then, part heard and after passing the previous order which I have set out before, another order on 12th of August, 1978 was passed. In the said order the Appeal Committee stated as follows :