UTPAL MAN Vs. JYOTIRMOY SEN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is an appeal directed against the order passed by the Learned Single Judge dated 1811 Sept., 1998 whereby the Learned Single Judge has allowed the writ petition and set aside the order of the District Inspector of Schools for recasting the original panel. The Learned Single Judge further directed that the District Inspector of Schools to approve the panel originally prepared pursuant to the interview held on 15th May, 1997 in which the petitioner figured as No. 1 and sent to the District Inspector of I Schools concerned for approval on 291" May, 1997. It was further observed that in view of the revival of the panel it should be approved by the District Inspector of Schools by 31y' Oct., 1998 and the school authorities should also issue appointment to the first empanelled candidate namely the petitioner within 15 days. It was also pointed out so far as the private respondent No. 7, who has been working in the school in place of the writ petitioner, he cannot continue. However, if there is any vacancy in the language group in the same school, the same shall be filled up by the school authorities forthwith and will allow the respondent No. 7 to appear at the interview and this case should be considered on priority basis taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of this case, and if a panel is prepared the name of the respondent No. 7 should be included and the District Inspector of Schools shall approve the said panel. It was also pointed out that anther post in language group was originally reserved for Scheduled Tribe which was filled up, the person has left his job and automatically the post has fallen vacant under the general category. It was ordered that this post too should be filled up and the School Service Commission shall not stand in the way of filling up of the above posts. On account of this the respondent No. 7 was dislodged from the service, therefore he was driven to file the present appeal.

(2.) The petitioner filed this writ petition challenging the order dated 111i Aug., 1997 (Annexure "F") issued by the District Inspector of Schools (Secondary Education), Bankura whereby his name was not approved for appointment to the post of Assistant Teacher (English) and approved the name of respondent No. 7 Utpal Man, who was second in the panel. It is alleged that the post was lying vacant in the Latiaboni Anchal High School, P.O. Durlavpur, District Bankura and permission was accorded by the District Inspector of Schools for filling up this vacancy of the Assistant Teacher of English in the said school. The petitioner's name was sent by the Employment Exchange and he appeared at the interview before the Selection Committee along with other candidates. A panel was prepared by the Selection Committee and the name of the petitioner appeared first in the panel, the panel was forwarded by the school for approval to the District Inspector of Schools. The petitioner subsequently came to know that the District Inspector of Schools has approved the name of respondent No. 7, Utpal Man, who was second in the panel and has been appointed as Assistant Teacher in English of Latiaboni Anchal High School, Bankura. Thereafter, the petitioner made necessary inquiries and found that the name of the petitioner was not approved by the District Inspector of Schools and a person appearing in the second position has been approved. Therefore, accordingly appointment has been issued. Aggrieved against this order the petitioner filed a writ petition being W.P. No. 19693 (W) of 1997. The question arose in that writ petition was whether the B.Ed. degree obtained by the petitioner from the Annamalai University, Madras through correspondence course is recognised or not. Therefore, the District Inspector of Schools directed the school authorities to recast the panel and the school authorities recasted the panel and accordingly the same was approved and appointment of respondent No. 7 followed. The Learned Single Judge after considering the matter came to the conclusion that the B. Ed. degree obtained through correspondence course from Annamalai University is recognised by the Government of West Bengal which is equivalent to B.T./B.Ed. degree and the approved teachers who have obtained this degree has been granted higher pay and other benefits as are admissible to them. Therefore, the learned Single Judge held that there is no reason to deprive any person of the benefit of appointment on the basis of such B. Ed. degree obtained from Annamalai University. In this connection Learned Single Judge referred to a decision given in the case of Mucha Mondal Vs. State of West Bengal, reported in 1996(1) CLJ 306 . In that case the M.A. degree through correspondence course from the Himachal Pradesh University came up for consideration and the Learned Single Judge held that since Himachal Pradesh University has been established under the Himachal Pradesh University Act, 1970 and the same has been recognised by the University Grants Commission (UGC), therefore the degree granted by the Himachal Pradesh University is recognised and on the same reasoning the Learned Single Judge has held that the B.Ed. degree granted by the Annamalai University is also recognisable and the rejection of the candidature of the petitioner by the District Inspector of Schools was wrong and accordingly the Learned Single Judge issued the aforesaid directions.

(3.) Aggrieved against this order the present appeal has been filed by the appellant/respondent No. 7 whose appointment has been set aside by the Learned Single Judge.