JOYDEB ROY Vs. KAKALI MONDAL AND ORS.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal is directed against a judgment dated May 19, 2011, passed in the matter of Kakali Mondal v/s. Joydeb Roy & Ors. (In re: WP No. 12307 (W) of 2009) directing the District Project Officer, Krishnagar, to approve the engagement of the respondent No. 1/writ petitioner to the post of para teacher in Huda Digambarpur Primary School (hereinafter referred to as the said school) within three weeks from the date of communication of the above judgment.

(2.) According to the appellant, applications were invited under advertisement bearing No. 553/SSA dated June 10, 2004, from the eligible candidates for engagement of 1328 numbers of additional para teachers in primary schools in the District of Nadia, amongst other vacancies. Pursuant to the above advertisement, nine candidates including the appellant and the respondent No. 1 (a female candidate) participated in the selection process for engagement in the said school, District -Nadia. The appellant and the respondent No. 1 submitted their respective applications for consideration of their candidatures for engagement in the post of Additional Para Teacher in the said school, Gobindapur Gram Panchayat -II, Krishnagar.

(3.) After consideration of the candidatures of the aforesaid candidates, the Village Education Committee concern prepared a merit list dated August 16, 2004, of the aforesaid candidates in order of merit. The name of one Nasiruddin Mondal appeared in serial No. 1 (obtaining 52.60% marks), that of the appellant in serial No. 2 (obtaining 45.00% marks) and that of the respondent No. 1 against serial No. 7 (obtaining 41.51% marks) in the above merit list. The District Project Officer, Sarba Shiksha Adhikarik, Krishnagar, Nadia (respondent No. 4) approved the names of the aforesaid Nasisuddin Mondal and Joydeb Roy (serial No. 1 and 2 of the merit list respectively) for engagement as additional para teachers in respect of two vacancies of the said school. The appellant joined in the above school on September 9, 2004. The respondent No. 1 filed an application under Article 226 of the Constitution of India assailing the aforesaid engagement of the appellant on the ground that the decision of engaging the appellant in the post of additional para teacher was taken violating the policy of maintaining reservation of 50% posts for "women teachers" under Sarba Shiksha Avijan.