The D.S.E. is not empowered to adjudicate disputed questions of fact.

( 1 ) THIS Letters Patent appeal is against the judgment and order dated 23rd April 2000 passed in Writ Petition No. 543 of 2002. The writ petition was filed by the four appellants. By the impugned judgment and order the learned single Judge was pleased to dismiss it.

( 2 ) WHILE hearing the application for interim order, we took up the hearing of the appeal itself, by treating it as on the day's list by consent of the parties.

( 3 ) THE writ petition was filed challenging a decision dated 29th January 2002 given by the Director of School Education, West Bengal (in short "d. S. E. " ). The decision of the D. S. E. was that the appellants were not entitled to get approval of their appointment as organizer teachers of "thiba Anchal High School" (hereinafter referred to as "the school") situated at Pose Office: Bhatra, District: Birbhum of the State of West Bengal.

( 4 ) THE relevant portion of the decision of the D. S. E. is quoted below:-"heard the parties. Consider the submission including the representation of the petitioners. Perused all papers including the report of the District Inspector of Schools dated 29-1-99 as were placed before me. It appears that Thiba Anchal Jr. High School was not permitted to run un-recognised units of Class IX and X by the West Bengal Board of Secondary Education to send up candidates for Madhyamik Examination. It appears from the Resolution Book of the Managing Committee that there was no existence of classes IX and X in the said School at the point of time. It reveals that the Secretary and the Head of the Institution did not mention the name of the petitioner in the column of the format of the Inspection Report. West Bengal Board of Secondary Education in terms of its Circular No. 12/78 dated 31-12-78 has disallowed all the Schools to send up candidates in the Madhyamik Examination. It means that the petitioners were so called engaged by the School authority at a time when the said School had no permission to send up candidates in the Madhyamik Examination and naturally the School had no authority to open un-recognized units of classes IX and X. In such case, the appointment of petitioners can not be claimed to be the organizing staff and their services cannot be approved since the names of the petitioners do not appear in the Resolution Book of the Managing Committee of the School, on other records and documents of the school and in the report of the District Inspector of School and in the final inspection report leading to up-gradation of the School. "

( 5 ) WITH effect from 1st May 1991 the school was recognized by the West Bengal Board of Secondary Education (in short "board") as a four class Junior High School. On 14th May 1998 The District Level Inspection Team (in short "d. L. I. T. ") inspected it for the purpose of this up-gradation to a High School. In its report dated 21st May 1998 the D. L. I. T. mentioned that class IX and X were not there in the school. The Education Department of the State Government by a letter dated 24th July 1998 recommended its up-gradation. Thereupon, the Board upgraded it to a High School, and granted its permission to open class IX from 1st May 1988, and Class X from 1st May 1999. By the concerned letter dated 7th August 1998, the Board also granted it permission to admit students in Class IX within 31st August 1998. One of the conditions of the up-gradation was that the appointment of teachers for classes IX and X should be made according to the staff pattern prescribed by the D. S. E.

( 6 ) AFTER its up-gradation the appellants raised a claim that classes IX and X of the school were actually started in the year 1993; and on being appointed by its Managing Committee, all of them joined the service on 9th July 1993 for teaching the students of the newly opened classes IX and X. They alleged that the District Inspector of Schools (in short "d. I. ") did not mention their names in the D. L. I. T. report as organizer teachers, althoug