RANJIT KUMAR SEN Vs. STATE OF WEST BENGAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) In this writ petition the petitioner, a candidate recommended by the School Service Commission for appointment to the post of Headmaster of Maru Masina Bansa Jr. High School, has challenged the action of Managing Committee who refused to appoint him in the said post. The petitioner is qualified with M.A. in History and he is still working as Assistant Teacher in Social Science Group in another school. The Managing Committee of the school has not issued any appointment letter in favour of the petitioner despite recommendation of the petitioner's name for such post of Headmaster in the said school by the West Bengal Regional School Service Commission, Western Region, Bankura. The petitioner has come up in this writ petition challenging the action of the Managing Committee. As per direction the respective parties have filed opposition and reply.

(2.) The writ application has been opposed by the Managing Committee of the school by filing affidavit upon contending, inter alia, that the petitioner being qualified with M.A. in History was not allowed to join in the school as Headmaster since in terms of the Managing Committee's resolution relating to such vacancy of Headmaster, the school wanted a candidate of Language Group being qualified with M.A. in English to hold the post of Headmaster. It is further contended that the School Authority in terms of the Rule referred to such resolution relating to the post of Headmaster to the District Inspector of Schools concerned who in turn did not modify the same but upon confirming the same had referred it to the School Service Commission for necessary recommendation. It is further contended that the School Service Commission was bound to follow the requisition of the school relating to the vacancy prescribing qualification and the group which was confirmed by the District Inspector of Schools concerned. It is further contended that the School Service Commission being a statutory authority must act within the domain of the statute and it being the recommending authority had no power to decide the qualification of the candidate as would be necessary in the particular school i.e. to decide the nature of vacancy itself. It is contended by the School Authority that the school prepared a staff pattern including a post of Assistant Teacher marked for a candidate who would teach History and a candidate have already been appointed by the recommendation of the School Service Commission prior to the recommendation of petitioner in terms of staff pattern. So at the present moment there is no scope to appoint any other candidate qualified with History subject in the post of Headmaster as same would foul the staff pattern as already approved by District Inspector of Schools and accepted by School Service Commission.

(3.) The School Service Commission supports the writ application by contending, inter alia, that they have acted within their power and the Managing Committee was bound to appoint the recommended candidate. The learned Advocate for the petitioner argued that the Managing Committee being a creature of the statute was required to follow the recommendation as made by the School Service Commission. Reliance has been placed to the judgment passed by the Division Bench of this Court in M.A.T. 1331 of 2000.