LAWS(CAL)-2019-11-101

BHAIRAB SARDAR Vs. STATE OF WEST BENGAL

Decided On November 14, 2019
Bhairab Sardar Appellant
V/S
STATE OF WEST BENGAL Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner seeks setting aside of an order dated 16th January, 2019 passed by the District Inspector of Schools (S.E.), Kolkata, by which the petitioner's prayer for a higher scale of pay (post-graduate) was rejected.

(2.) The reason for rejecting the claim of the petitioner is that the petitioner did not seek prior permission from the District Inspector of Schools through the Managing Committee of the School under the provisions of the West Bengal Schools (Control of Expenditure) Act, 2005 read with G.O. No. 593 -SE (B) dated 27.11.2007.

(3.) The case of the petitioner, as submitted by learned counsel, is that the petitioner was recommended as an Assistant Teacher in History in Hons./Post Graduate category to the concerned school after successfully passing the Regional Level Selection Test, 2002. The petitioner's appointment was approved by the District Inspector of Schools recording that the petitioner was qualified in B.A. Hons. in History as on the date of joining. This is dated 2nd January, 2004. Immediately upon joining the school, the petitioner made an application before the Headmaster for allowing him to sit for the M.A. Part II examination. The petitioner completed M.A. Part I examination on 7th October, 2003 before receiving the recommendation letter. The schedule for the M.A. Part II examination, annexed to the writ petition, shows that the last date of the said examination was on 18th July, 2005, being the date of examination of Paper VIII of the concerned subject. Learned counsel also relies on a letter dated 26th October, 2006, addressed to the Secretary of the concerned school from the Secretary, West Bengal Board of Secondary Education granting approval to the proposal of the Managing Committee for sanctioning study leave on full pay to the petitioner under the relevant Leave Rules. Learned counsel submits that the objection taken by the District Inspector of Schools in the impugned order relying on the 2005 Act or the