BISWANATH SETH Vs. STATE OF WEST BENGAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner was a Headmaster of a school. Charges of financial irregularities were levelled against him. Complaint was made to the authorities. The petitioner made an application for ball. Bail was not granted on 1.2.2001. The Secretary of the Managing Committee (for short 'the Secretary of the school') by a Memo dated 8.2.2001 placed the petitioner under suspension with effect from 1.2.2001 until further orders. The Secretary of the school by letter dated 26.4.2001 intimated the petitioner that as per the resolution of the Managing Committee dated 19.4.2001, he was found prima facie liable to the charges and the petitioner was requested to give the reply to the charge within a period of 15 days from the date of receipt of the Article of Charges. The copy of the article of charges with all documents and the resolution passed by the Managing Committee was enclosed along with the letter dated 26.4.2001. The petitioner replied to the said charges denying each and every charge as mentioned in the article of charges. The said reply was received by the school authorities on 18.5.2001.

(2.) The school authorities on 19.10.2001 forwarded the necessary papers to the West Bengal Board of Secondary Education (for short 'the Board') for approval of the proposal of the school for initiating disciplinary proceedings against the petitioner. The petitioner retired on 30.11.2001. The Board did not send its approval. According to the petitioner the departmental proceedings cannot continue after the retirement.

(3.) The petitioner prior to the framing of the charges as well as the suspension order, submitted the Service Book before the District Inspector of Schools (Secondary Education), Howrah [for short D.I.(S.E.)] on 27.7:99 for counter-signature of the D.I.(S.E.). As it was not done the petitioner sent number of reminders and representations but without success. The D.I.(S.E.), Howrah by a letter dated 6.7.2001 addressed to the Secretary of the school, requested to reconstruct the service book of the petitioner from the available records of the school as the original of the same was not readily available in the office of the D.I.(S.E.), Howrah. It was further mentioned in the said letter that there was a duplicate service book, reconstructed by the petitioner in the said office and the Secretary of the school was requested to take help of that service book at the time of reconstruction of the same for verification. It was pointed out that the matter was extremely urgent as the petitioner would retire on 30.11.2001. The petitioner while under suspension retired from the service. The petitioner being aggrieved by the purported disciplinary proceedings and for non-payment of the retrial benefits has moved the instant writ application.