ANJALI GHOSH Vs. STATE OF WEST BENGAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) For effective adjudication of the matters in dispute both C.R. No. 13210 (W)/83 and C.O. No. 11116 (W)/85 are taken up for hearing analogously. It appears that Sm. Anjali Ghosh has obtained the aforesaid rule on 22.12.83 praying, inter alia, for a writ of mandamas commanding the respondents to forbear from giving effect to the impugned orders copies of which are annexures 'C and 'E' to the writ petition and also commanding the respondents to forthwith release the salary of the petitioner on the revised scale of pay as detailed in the writ petition and for other consequential reliefs as stated in the writ petition. Looking at the annexures 'C' and 'E' to the writ petition, it appears that a communication dated 16.3.83 has been sent from the District Inspector of Schools (SE), Midnapore to the Secretary of the Ghatal Basanta Kumari Girls' High School as to the final release of the grant-in-aid to the teaching and non-teaching staff of the school on account of fixation of pay in the revised scale introduced with effect from 1.4.81. With regard to the order of the District Inspector of Schools (SE), as communicated under memo No. 4587-S dated 29.6.83 to the Secretary of the aforesaid school as regards irregular change in the staff pattern of the school, it has been stated that the school authorities made a resolution proposing to change the position of the petitioner Sm. Anjali Ghosh from Work Education Group to Language Group and transferring one Sm. Nirmala Roy, as Assistant Teacher of the Language Group to Work Education group. The aforesaid resolution of the school authorities has been negatived by the District Inspector of Schools and the petitioner Sm. Anjali Ghosh is aggrieved thereby.

(2.) Another writ petition has been filed by one Smt.Nirmala Roy, which was entertained on 6th August, 1.985 and a civil order was made for maintenance of status quo. According to her she has been working in the language group from the very beginning and the school authorities cannot make any resolution to the prejudice of interest of the said Assistant Teacher and the staff pattern cannot be changed by transferring her from language group to work education group and the District Inspector of Schools concerned has rightly negatived the proposed staff pattern.

(3.) As both the matters are correlated, this Court has heard the respective parties, namely Mr. Banerjee for the writ petitioner Sm. Anjali Ghosh and Mr. Mondal for Sm. Nirmala Roy and Mr. Sahoo for the school authorities. Significantly none appears for the State respondents. The only point for consideration is that although Sm. Anjali Ghosh has obtained all the pecuniary benefits in terms of the interim order of this court, the staff pattern has not been changed enabling her to get the benefit of working in the language group. It has, however, been brought to the notice of this Court that in the meantime both the petitioners in their respective cases have improved their qualification by obtaining M.A. Degree and there is no bar for them to receive the salary on the M.A. Scale and to get the benefit on the revised scale. A dispute has come that in order to accommodate Sm. Anjali Ghosh, the interest of Sm. Nirmala Roy has been affected and there is no reason to change the staff pattern to the prejudice of Sm. Nirmala Roy for accommodating Sm. Anjali Ghosh.