STATE OF WEST BENGAL Vs. GOPAL SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) IDENTICAL issue involved in these appeals was dealt with by us in the case of Gautam Bandyopadhyay (MAT 1413/2004 ). The said unreported judgment was relied upon by another Division Bench in the case of Smritikana, Maity and Ore. (FMA 94/2006 ). The Division Bench of this Court consistently held that irregular appointees in unrecognised section of any aided school are not entitled to have their service regularised after the school is upgraded as they were appointed contrary to the Recruitment rules. In the instant case also the respondents claim to be the organising staff of the upgraded school of the concerned school. There is also a dispute between two groups of teaching staff making rival claims. Learned Single judge allowed their writ petitions by asking the State to regularise all and accommodate them. State was asked to create vacancy by creating posts for the excess staff.

(2.) BEING aggrieved by and dissatisfied with the judgment and order of the learned Single Judge the State preferred the instant appeals.

(3.) MR. Saikat Banerjee, learned Counsel, appearing for the State in support of the appeals, has relied on various unreported decisions including those referred to above and has contended that Rule 28 of the Management rules was not followed at all while giving purported appointment to the respondents by the then managing committee of the concerned school. Mr. Banerjee contends that the issue is squarely covered by the decision in the case of Smritikana Maity (supra) and relying on the said decision Mr. Banerjee prays for setting aside of the judgment and order of the learned single Judge being contrary to the ratio decided by the Division Bench.