RAMAPADA SAMANTA Vs. STATE OF WEST BENGAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) In this writ application the writ petitioner has prayed for the following reliefs :-

(2.) It is the case of the writ petitioner that on 3rd August, 1992 the Managing Committee of the school appointed him to perform the duties of class IV staff i.e. peon as well as clerk of the School in question. Since the writ petitioner was not absorbed in Class IV staff, the petitioner approached this Court by filling a writ petition C.O. No. 382 (W) of 1994 with a prayer to appear before the selection Committee for interview for the post of Class IV Staff. Though the name of the writ petitioner was not sponsored from the Employment Exchange, but his candidature was considered for the Class IV staff i.e. Peon as per order of said proceeding and his service was duly approved by the District Inspector of Schools (SE) Howrah with effect from 19th August, 1996. Subsequently when a vacancy occurred in the post of Clerk and the petitioner has requisite qualification for such, he moved a writ petition being W.P. 20918(W) of 98 before this Court praying for his absorption in the said post as the writ petitioner was discharging duty of a Clerk of the School in addition to his service as peon being Class IV staff. By order dated 7.1.99 Amitava Lala, J. directed the respondents to consider the representation within a period of four weeks from the date of communication of that order by passing a reasoned order upon giving an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner.

(3.) In pursuance of such direction of this Court hearing completed on 8th April, 1999 and the decision as communicated by letter dated 13th May, 1999 by the District Inspector of Schools (SE) Howrah has been impugned in the instant writ petition. The petitioner's prayer for absorbing his in the post of Clerk has been rejected by the D.I.S. (SE) concerned on the ground that the petitioner was tendering the duty of the Clerk without any permission from the competent authority; no formal appointment letter was issued to him; no normal procedure of recruitment rules to appoint a Clerk was maintained in the case of the petitioner which was very much important in the appointment of teaching and non-teaching staff of recognised school. The writ petitioner in this writ petition has prayed for quashing of the said impugned decision and consequential relief of absorption. Though in the writ petition there is no pleading to this effect that the writ petitioner would be allowed to appear in interview for the post of Clerk along with other sponsored candidates when the said vacancy to be filled up, the learned Advocate for the petitioner submits that his client has accrued right in term of Clause 4c of the direction issued by the District Inspector of Schools (SE) under Memo No. 1736(21) GA dated 1st November, 1999 for such consideration. The learned Advocate for the State, on the other-hand, opposed the writ application contending that the writ petitioner was not entitled to be absorbed in the post in question and for any direction to appear in the interview along with other candidates for the said post at this stage.