MD. AINUR RAHAMAN KHAN Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The question as to whether the qualification acquired by a candidate for the post of Assistant Teacher subsequent to the date of sponsorship of the name by the Employment Exchange can be taken into consideration involves in this appeal. The fact of the matter lies in a very narrow compass. Pursuant to prior sanction granted by the District Inspector of Schools (S.E.) in terms of the Rule framed by the Director of School Education, names of the petitioner/appellant and the concerned respondent were sponsored. Such sponsorship took place on 21.4.1997.

(2.) The appellant appeared at the B.Ed. Examination and his result was published by the University of Calcutta on 14.3.1997. The Selection Committee constituted by the Managing Committee of the school held interview on 22.4.1997. Apart any other questions, a pure question of law which arises for consideration in this appeal is as to whether any mark can be allotted in favour of the writ petitioner in respect of the said B.Ed. qualification or not.

(3.) Mr. Gupta, learned Counsel, appearing on behalf of the appellant has strongly relied upon a decision of the Supreme Court of India in the case of Ashok Kumar Sharma Vs. Chander Shekher, reported in 1993 Supp(2) SCC 611 : 1993(2) SCT 208 wherein the Supreme Court by majority held that the appellants were fully qualified on the dates of interview and taking into account the generally followed principle of Rule 37 in the State of Jammu and Kashmir, too much technical view cannot be taken. The learned Counsel has also placed strong reliance upon a decision of a Division Bench of this Court in Bharati Roy Vs. Shyamal Mukhopadhyay, reported in 1997(2) Cal LJ 386. According to the learned Counsel, it is well-settled principle of law that eligible candidate should be appointed and in support of the aforementioned contention, the learned Counsel has relied upon a decision of the Apex Court in the case of Excise Superintendent, Malkapatnam, Krishna District, A.P. Vs. K.B.N. Visweshwara Rao and others, reported in 1996(6) SCC 216.