MAKHANLAL CHAKRAVARTY Vs. S K CHATTERJEE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The facts in this case are as follows. There is a School at Kanchrapara, in the 24-par-ganas, known as the Kancharapara Boys' High School. It was established in 1949, and provides educational facilities for children of refugee families. I am told that the present roll-strength is well over seven hundred. It was commenced in hogla sheds, but now owns a pucca structure, a substantial part of the cost of which was borne by the Government of West Bengal in its Refugee Relief and Rehabilitation department. The School was being administered by a managing committee of which the petitioner was the Secretary. This managing committee was constituted on 10-4-1949. The school received provisional recognition from the University of Calcutta for two years from 1-1-1949 to 31-12-1950, with permission to present candidates at the Matriculation examination in 1950 and 1951. On or about 10-3-1951, the Syndicate of the Calcutta University passed a resolution, granting a conditional recognition to the school from 1-1-1951 to 31-13-1952. In 1950 the' West Bengal Secondary Education Act 37 of 1950 had come into operation (It came into operation in September 1950) and on 19-3-1953, the Secretary to the Board of Secondary Education (hereinafter referred to as the 'Board') wrote to the petitioner that the president had granted an extension of recognition to the school for one year commencing from 1-1-1953, with permission to present candidates for the School Final examination 1954. This was also subject to conditions. On or about 26-7-1951, the president of the Board had issued a circular that schools asking for recognition for the first time should constitute their managing committees according to the provisions of the revised School Code, but in Schools where reconstitution of the managing committee was due under the revised Code, the existing managing committees should function until further instructions. On 19-l-1953.it was further notified that if the existing managing committee had been approved by the Calcutta University, it should continue to function unless the Board directed it to be reconstituted. The managing committee which was running the school was of course approved by the Calcutta University. Certain complaints were received by the Board about the Headmaster and the members of the managing committee and Mr. Surendra Chandra Chakravarty the officiating Assistant Director, Public Instructions, Government of West Bengal, was deputed by the president to inspect the school and make enquiries. He made two visits to the school, one on 6-1-1953 and another on 11-1-1953. Complaints were also received by the West) Bengal Government and an audit was made of the accounts,

(2.) On 11-2-1953, the Financial Adviser to the Refugee and Rehabilitation Department of the Government of West Bengal, made a report that the inspection of the accounts of the school disclosed a serious state of affairs. It was found that the school maintained no Cash Book, that the muster-rolls contained forged entries, that large sums were drawn for the girls' section even before it was recognised by the Board and no attendance register for 1950 at all was available for that section. There were irregular withdrawals and disbursement by help of issuing false certificates. Finally it was pointed out that Rule 25,500/- had been sanctioned by Government of which Rs. 15000/- had already been advanced. No-tender even was invited for the construction.

(3.) Mr. S.C. Chakravarty made his report on 20-2-1953. He reported amongst other things that the existing managing committee was unconstitutional. The president of the committee had submitted his resignation in January 1951 as he had migrated to Calcutta and was not attending meetings. There were other members who were not entitled to be members or had ceased to have the requisite qualifications, but were still continuing to act as members. He further reported serious instance of mal-administration. For example, students we're admitted in excess of the permissible limit with the result that classes were shown to exist, but no available space in which they could function, and the school professed to teach, subjects for which there were no teachers. The results were extremely curious. It is mentioned that when the D. I. of Schools went to inspect the school, a whole section of boys was concealed from him, because there was no accommodation for them. The School Registers were found to be defective, and it appeared that students were admitted to class X even after the Test Examination was over. Extensive malpractices were reported in the drawal of tuition fees. Regarding the secretary, it was reported that he was entrusted with the construction of the school building. No tenders were invited but a labour contractor was entrusted with the work. The same contractor was engaged to build a house for the Headmaster and for a member of the managing committee. The Secretary was unable to produce vouchers for large quantity of materials that were stated to have been used for the construction of the' building. The report proceeds to say "Sri M.L. Chakravarty is only a Matriculate and a person of doubtful integrity. It was most unfortunate that he was in charge of the construction of the school building." Mr. Chakravarty recommended that the managing committee was acting perversely and should be removed and an ad hoc committee of seven persons should be appointed, consisting of the S. D. O. Barrackpore, the Chairman Kanchrapara Municipality, etc.