PARTHA SARATHI MANDAL Vs. STATE OF WEST BENGAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The matter was adjourned on the last date since the learned advocate for the District Primary School Council, Nadia, was required to satisfy the Court with regard to the competency of Jay Sankar Barai to verify an affidavit on behalf of the District Primary School Council, Nadia, wherein he has described himself of being "within the capacity of law assistant at the Nadia District Primary School Council". During course of hearing, the learned advocate for the Council has referred to Oaths Act, 1969 and submits that section 4(1)(a) of the said Act is applicable. Perusing the provisions of the Oath Act, 1969, it appears that this statute relates to judicial oath and for certain other purposes as described in the said Act. Section 4 of the said Act, which has been relied on by the learned advocate for the Council, deals with oaths or affirmation to be made by witnesses, interpreters and juries. The said provision of law has no manner of application at all in respect of the facts of the present case.

(2.) In the facts of the instant case, this Court takes into consideration the Rules of this Court relating to applications under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. In particular, Rules 15 and 16 of the said Rules, which are set out herein below:-

(3.) The report in the form of an affidavit, which is sought to be filed on behalf of the District Primary School Council, Nadia, is affirmed by one Jay Sankar Barai, who has described himself of being "within the capacity of law assistant at the Nadia District Primary School Council." Under the provision of sub-section (3) of section 37 of the West Bengal Primary Education Act, 1973, the District Primary School Council, Nadia, is a body corporate with perpetual succession and a common seal. Since there is no manner of doubt, whatsoever, that the District Primary School Council, Nadia, is a body corporate --being akin to an artificial juristic entity such as a Company registered under the Companies Act or a Corporation - the provision of law that would apply for the purpose of verification of an affidavit by way of solemn affirmation has been clearly spelt out under Rule 16, as quoted above. In this context it is also noticed that no affidavit of competency has been annexed to the report in the form of an affidavit sought to be filed in Court by Jay Sankar Barai who has stated, inter alia, in paragraph 1 thereof that he was competent to swear the affidavit, "being authorised on behalf of the Nadia District Primary School Council and on behalf of the Chairman of the said Council." No copy of any resolution taken by the Council duly authorizing him to represent the interest of the Council has been annexed to the report in the form of an affidavit or produced before this Court either.