MD SALAUDDIN MIRZA Vs. STATE OF WEST BENGAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) IN Re: CAN 10714 of 2011

(2.) IN spite of service none appears on behalf of the District Primary School Council when the matter is taken up today. This is an application for restoration of the writ petition, which was dismissed on 22nd November 2011. The cause for non-appearance on the said date when the matter was dismissed for default has been shown in paragraph 7 of the said application which I find to be sufficient. Hence, the order dated 22nd November 2011is hereby recalled. The application, being C.A.N. 10714 of 2011, is allowed. The writ application be restored to its original file and number. IN Re: W.P. 12396 (W) of 2008 By consent of the parties the writ petition is taken up for hearing.

(3.) LEARNED Advocate appearing for the State submits that it is the Council who is the competent authority to pass an order of punishment and as such the State respondents have very little role in respect of the grievance raised in this writ petition. From the affidavit-in-opposition, filed by the District Primary School Council on an earlier occasion, it appears that the order of punishment, which is assailed in this writ petition, was an outcome of mass allegation by the villagers. At page 4 of the said opposition it is categorically stated that upon receipt of the complaint from the Sub Inspector of School, the Chairman, District Primary School Council gave personal hearing to the petitioner on 13th June, 2007 at 1 p.m. where the petitioner alleged to have admitted all the allegations and consented for demotion. Such fact, however, has been disputed by the petitioner in reply where it is categorically stated that the petitioner did not admit any of the charges and the alleged letter of consenting demotion was written on instruction of the Chairman of the District Primary School Council.