A. K. BANERJEE, J.

( 1 ) THE writ petitioner by way of this writ petition has challenged the order passed by the District Inspector of Schools, Midnapore appearing at page 64 of the writ petition. The writ petitioner was a sponsored candidate by the Employment Exchange for the post of science teacher in the concerned school. According to him he was possessing the qualification of B. Sc. (Pure Science) and B. Ed. degree. His B. Ed. qualification was not considered by the interview board when the eligibility was "b. Sc. (Pure Science) preferably B. Ed. " He made representation to the District Inspector of Schools. Being denied of any assistance from the District Inspector of Schools, writ petitioner moved an earlier writ petition which resulted in an order directing the District Inspector of Schools to consider his representation upon hearing the concerned parties. The impugned order is the result of such enquiry having been done by the District Inspector of Schools pursuant to the order of this Court in the said earlier writ petition.

( 2 ) MR. Sanyal learned Advocate appearing for the writ petitioner has contended that it is the obligation of the Employment Exchange to send names along with the respective qualifications. He has relied upon his employment exchange card appearing at page 55 of the writ petition showing his B. Ed. qualification. According to Mr. Sanyal no other candidate appearing at the said interview did possess B. Ed. qualification. The factum of non-possession of B. Ed. qualification by the other candidates is not disputed by any of the appearing parties.

( 3 ) MR. Das learned Advocate appearing for the school authority produced the original documents pertaining to the said interview including the attendence sheet, score sheets and a xerox copy of the list sponsored by the employment exchange. According to Mr. Das before the inteview board neither in the employment exchange list any mention of the said qualification was there nor the candidate himself produced any document in support thereof. Hence, the question of consideration of the said qualification did not arise before the interview board. All the candidates having the qualification of Science graduate, were treated at par so far qualification is concerned and were interviewed by the board.

( 4 ) MR. Biswas learned Advocate appearing for the successful candidate being the Respondent No. 9, submitted that whether the document pertaining to the additional qualificational has been produced or not, is pure question of fact and once it is decided by the District Inspector of Schools pursuant to the order of the Court, this Court should not up-set such decision sitting in a writ jurisdiction. According to Mr. Biswas, the appropriate remedy should be by way of a regular Civil suit. Mr. Biswas also contended that in any event, since the B. Ed. qualification has been obtained by the petitioner from an University which is not recognised one, the question of non-consideration of such qualification is superfluous.

( 5 ) IN support of his contentions Mr. Biswas relied on the decision reported in AIR 1958 SC page 398 (Head Notes 'c' ). The portion of the head note relied on by Mr. Biswas is quoted below :-"the Appellate Authority is contemplated by the section to be the highest authority for deciding questions of settlement of liquor shops, as between rival claimants. The appeal or revision being undefined and unlimited in its scope the highest authority under the Act, could not be deprived of the plentitude of its powers by introducing considerations which are not within the Act or the rules. It is true that the Appellate Authority should not lightly set aside the selection made by the primary authority, that is to say, a selection made by a sub-divisional officer or by a District Collector, should be given due weight in view of the fact that they have much greater opportunity to know local conditions and local business people than the appellate authority even

Click Here to Read the rest of this document