SUSMITA BHOWMICK Vs. CHAIRMAN, AD HOC COMMITTEE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS writ petition involves a chequered history.

(2.) THE petitioners being the unsuccessful candidates have challenged the panel prepared in the year 1996 in clear contravention to the statutory rules. Before the bifurcation of the District Medinipore, the vacancies to the post of a primary teacher was notified to the Employment Exchange in the year 1987. Although the Employment Exchange sponsored the names but the selection process could not commence because of the intervening litigations pending in the High Court. By another letter, the District Primary School Council of undivided Medinipore again notified the vacancies occurred between the year 1991 to 1998 and the Employment Exchange sponsored 40,475 names up to the month of November, 1992. Similarly other District Primary School Council also notified the vacancies to the respective Employment Exchanges within the district contemplating the filling up of the post of the primary teacher in the different primary school. Several writ petitions were taken out by an association espousing the cause of the intending aspirants. Challenging the process and the manner of selection being violative of the statutory rules, those writ petitions were disposed of on September 28, 1989 as the appointments are made to an untrained candidates which is unauthorized and illegal. Challenging the said judgment, an appeal was preferred which was disposed of on May 10, 1991 directing the different District Primary School Councils to take step for preparation of the fresh panel in accordance with law and/or additional post sanctioned by the State Government due to the enhancement of the roll strength to be filled up by the trained candidates only. It was further directed that 50% of the normal vacancies shall be filled up by the trained candidates and the remaining 50% of such vacancies shall be filled up by taking into consideration the candidature of the untrained candidates alongh with the trained candidates on rational and reasonable principle. The special writ petition against the said order of the Division Bench was further disposed of by permitting the petitioners therein to challenge the panel if those are inconsistent with the direction made by the Division Bench in a separate proceeding before the High Court.

(3.) THE report submitted by the Special Officer reflects gross irregularities in preparation of the panel in respect of two district namely Medinipore and Howrah. The Division Bench in its judgment dated March 30, 1994 recorded the irregularities perpetrated in preparation of the panel in respect of the aforesaid districts and directed the Director of the School Education to reconsider the matter having due regard to the report of the Special Officer. The Director of School Education was further directed to recast the panel and in the event, such irregularities are found, the candidate eligible for an appointment shall be given such appointment and the persons who have been favoured illegally shall be kept in waiting until further vacancies are notified. However, some relief was given to the appointed persons to continue in service until the matter is considered by the Director of the School Education.