BINOY KUMAR MONDAL Vs. SMT. SWATA CHANDRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) : This case discloses some peculiar facts which are distressing and this case had a chequered career. The petitioner, Binoy Kumar Mondal, a Primary Teacher, appeared is person before the learned Single Judge and because of his ignorance of law and the practice and procedure followed by this Court, he had to pay a penalty.

(2.) For the purpose of appointment of a Primary Teacher en interview took place by the competent authority and on the basis of the regular interview in accordance with the Recruitment Rules, the petitioner Binoy Kuaiar Mondal was placed 26 in the panel. It is not In dispute that in the said panel was giving effect to in respect of the tome candidates in the panel and the petitioner has been able to find out at least one candidate of the said candidates who has been given appointment on the basis of the said selection panel, for not giving appointment on the basis of the panel as prepared. The petitioner moved the writ application before the learned Single Judge whereupon D. K. Basu, J. by an order dated 17.8 1992 Inter alia directed the District inspector of School, Primary Education, Murshidabad to file a report as regard the claim of the petitioner. The claim of the petitioner was simple that he was selected and fits name was placed la the panel but he was not given appointment on some mysterious grounds. The District Inspector of Schools pursuant to the order , passed by the Honourable Justice D K. Basu dated 17.8 92 held an enquiry and submitted the report before this Court in which it was categorically stated by the District Inspector of School. "Original correct report submitted by the District Inspector of Schools (Primary Education), Murshidabad. It was suppressed with force by the Chairmsa, Murshidabad District Primary School ( Council)." The District Inspector of Schools in his report dated 17.4.93 had stated that the claim of the petitioner was correct and based on facts end be was entitled to relief before this Court. The conclusion of the said report was as follows:-

(3.) From the said report it appears that the petitioner was an organiser teacher of a primary school and the said primary school was approved and when it was approved with the organiser teacher they were qualified and for that purpose of a selection committee was setup and the selection committee interviewed the candidates In accordance with the Recruitment Rules in which the petitioner succeeded as a candidate fit to be absorbed as a primary teacher. Thereafter, the said writ application came up for final hearing before the learned Single Judge of this Court and the learned Single Judge by the order dated 12th Dec., 1995 considered all the aspects of the matter is details in which the learned Single Judge found that the petitioner was entity to the relief as prayed for on the basis of the materials and information on record and ultimately passed the following order:-