BHIKHA SINGH Vs. STATE OF WEST BENGAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Upon notice to all the Respondents, the writ petition was moved on June 29, 1990. Since it was brought to the notice of this Court that the life of the impugned panel is likely to expire in the month of September 1990, the District Inspector of Schools (Secondary Education), Hooghly, was directed to produce all the relevant records before this Court within a fortnight for effective, adjudication in case no affidavit is filed within a fortnight from the date of receipt of the intimation. Ad interim order was made for maintenance of status quo until further order. On August 6, 1990, the matter was heard further and the learned Advocate for the State sought for an adjournment to enable the District Inspector of Schools (Secondary Education) to file the record. The District Inspector of Schools of Hooghly was further directed to produce all the relevant records as observed earlier. Pursuant to such directions, the relevant records have been filed.

(2.) The grievance of the Petitioner is that he is the Founder Member of D.S. Hindu Madhyamik Vidyalaya, at Chak Bansberia, district Hooghly and he is the Secretary of the present Managing Committee and he is aggrieved by the impugned order passed by the District Inspector of Schools (Secondary Education), Hooghly, under Memo No. 1358/Law/S.E. dated May 14, 1990 (copy of which is Annex. 'H' to the writ petition) and prays for a direction to accord approval to the panel (Annex. 'C' to the writ petition) prepared by the Selection Committee consequent upon the interview held on September 23, 1989, for appointment of Headmaster of D.S. Hindu Madhyamik Vidyalaya, Chak Bansberia, district. Hooghly. It is stated in details that on October 30, 1980, Sri Ganesh Prasad Dwiwedi, the approved Headmaster of the said School, retired from service. At the time of retirement, the said Headmaster handed over the charge to Sri Ramprit Singh who was the seniormost Assistant Teacher at the relevant point of time. The charge was handed over according to the instructions of the then Managing Committee. For the purpose of filling up the said vacant post and for appointment of a capable Headmaster of the said School, the Managing Committee of the said School by unanimous resolutions dated August 3, 1989, authorised the Petitioner to take necessary steps to fill up the vacant post which was lying vacant since October 30, 1980, after the retirement of the previous Headmaster.

(3.) The Petitioner as Secretary of the said School made an application on August 8, 1989, to the District Inspector of Schools (Secondary Education), Hooghly, seeking prior permission to appoint the Headmaster of the said School according to law. On repeated reminders, the District Inspector of Schools (Secondary Education), Hooghly, did not accord prior permission and in the circumstances the School authority pursuant to the appropriate rule inserted an advertisement in the Statesman, Calcutta, on September 6, 1989 and simultaneously requested the Employment ' Exchange authorities to furnish names of candidates within a specific date of requisition. In response to the aforesaid advertisement, the School authority received applications from the prospective candidates, a Selection Committee was duly constituted according to Rule 4(a) and 4(c) of the procedure for recruitment and the said Selection Committee duly interviewed the eligible candidates who applied for the post and the interview was taken on September 23, 1989. A panel was prepared by the Selection Committee and the Managing Committee of the School after due consideration forwarded the panel prepared by the Selection Committee with all relevant papers to the District Inspector of Schools for approval. The said panel and all the relevant papers are alleged to be submitted to the District Inspector of Schools (Secondary Education), Hooghly, on September 28, 1989, against proper receipt. It is placed on record that according to Item No. 5(d) of the Recruitment Rules, the District Inspector of Schools is required to convey his decision regarding the approval of the said panel ordinarily within a fortnight from the date of the receipt of the said panel.