SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2008 Supreme(Cal) 1039

High Court Of Calcutta
S.S. Nijjar, Sanjib Banerjee, JJ.
Birbhum District Primary School Council : Appellant
Versus
Md. Mokhtar Hossain : Respondent
Decided On : Dec 03, 2008

Advocates Appeared:
Kamalesh Bhattacharya, Mahaboob Ahmed, Ratul Biswas, Subir Sanyal, Sumita Sen,

A deemed suspension of a primary school teacher under Rule 7 (2) of the West Bengal Primary Education (Conduct of Service of Teachers of Primary Schools) Rules, 2001, continues until further orders from the appointing authority and does not automatically end upon the release of the teacher from detention.

Headnote:

PRIMARY SCHOOL TEACHER SUSPENSION - DEEMED SUSPENSION - CONTINUATION UNTIL FURTHER ORDERS - RULE 7 (2) OF THE WEST BENGAL PRIMARY EDUCATION (CONDUCT OF SERVICE OF TEACHERS OF PRIMARY SCHOOLS) RULES, 2001 - INTERPRETATION AND APPLICATION.

Fact of the Case:

A primary school teacher was arrested on criminal charges and detained in custody for more than 48 hours. A suspension notice was issued under Rule 7 (1) (b) of the West Bengal Primary Education (Conduct of Service of Teachers of Primary Schools) Rules, 2001, citing the teacher's detention. The teacher filed a writ petition challenging the suspension, arguing that it should have ended upon his release on bail. The learned Single Judge allowed the writ petition, holding that the suspension could not continue after the teacher was enlarged on bail.

Finding of the Court:

The Court held that the relevant rule, Rule 7 (2) of the 2001 Rules, provides for a deemed suspension of a primary school teacher who is detained in custody for a period exceeding 48 hours on a criminal charge or otherwise. The suspension comes into effect automatically upon the expiry of the period of 48 hours in detention and dates back to the date of the teacher's detention. The suspension continues until further orders, meaning that it remains in effect until an express order to the contrary is made by the appointing authority.

Issues: Whether the deemed suspension of a primary school teacher under Rule 7 (2) of the 2001 Rules continues until further orders or automatically ends upon the release of the teacher from detention.

Ratio Decidendi: The Court relied on the Supreme Court judgment in Union of India v. Rajiv Kumar, which held that an order of suspension deemed to have been made under Rule 10 (2) of the Central Civil Services (Classification, Control and Appeal) Rules, 1965, continues to be operative unless modified or revoked under sub-rule (5) (c), as provided under sub-rule (5) (a). The Court found that the substance of the relevant provision in the Rajiv Kumar case is akin, if not identical, to Rule 7 (2) of the 2001 Rules and applied the same principles of interpretation.

Final Decision: The Court set aside the judgment and order of the learned Single Judge and directed the Chairman of the appellant council to consider the teacher's written representation and dispose of the same by a speaking order within four weeks from the date of the order.

JUDGMENT:

1. A clause in the applicable rules relating to suspension of a primary school teacher falls for consideration in this appeal. The appellants are aggrieved by the order allowing the writ petition without calling for any affidavits and insist that the matter is of some significance on a point of principle.

2. FOLLOWING a criminal complaint against him, the writ petitioner-a head teacher at the Kubra Primary School under the Birbhum District Primary school Council-was arrested and produced before the Sub-Divisional Judicial magistrate in Rampurhat on August 6,2002. He remained in detention thereafter and was enlarged on bail on November 11, 2002. On November 1, 2002 the chairman of the District Primary School Council issued a letter of suspension citing the petitioner's detention in custody for a period exceeding 48 hours and the chairman's authority under a notification of February 5,1977 to issue the order of suspension. The order of suspension continued despite a representation of January 6, 2006 made by the writ petitioner for withdrawal thereof. The writ petition was filed in or about March, 2007 seeking a mandamus for rescinding the suspension notice and ancillary writs and directions. The learned Single Judge held that the petitioner could not continue to remain suspended after he was enlarged on bail as the order of suspension was to come to an end immediately upon the release of the petitioner. The notice of suspension was quashed and the reasons given in the impugned order are as follows :

"this Court had considered the aforesaid issue repeatedly and specifically held that suspension ends on the release of the teacher concerned from custody. It is well settled that the "deemed suspension" will come to an end when the concerned teacher will be released from detention by the competent criminal Court and mere pendency of investigation on a criminal charge cannot be a sufficient ground for keeping a teacher under suspension. In the case of Basudev Malik v. State of West Bengal, reported in (2004)1 Cal HN, page 32 Justice bhattacharya specifically held that upon release of the teacher from detention by the competent criminal Court, the "deemed suspension" will come to an end. The relevant portion from the aforesaid judgment is quoted hereunder : the moment he will be released from detention by the competent criminal court the "deemed suspension" will come to an end and the petitioner should be permitted to join his duty subject to the final decision in the criminal case. ' the identical view was also taken by this Hon'ble Court in the following decisions : (i) (2006)1 Cal HN, 34 (Chhabi Chakraborty v. State of West bengal) and (ii) (2006)2 Cal LJ (Cal), 456 (Malay Kumar Laha v. Visva bharati ). "

The appellants argue that the learned Single Judge did not consider the matter in the context of the applicable rules. Counsel for the District Primary school Council says that the Basudef v. Malik judgment that the learned Single judge relied on was rendered on a different set of rules ; that the Chhabi chakraborty judgment is at variance with a Supreme Court pronouncement; and, that the Malay Kumar Laha verdict was given by a learned Single Judge by merely relying on His Lordship's earlier decision in the Chhabi Chakraborty case. Counsel submits that the rules relevant in the present context are substantially the same as the rules that fell for consideration of the Supreme court in the judgment reported at (2003)6 SCC 516 : (2003)2 WBLR (SC) 587 (Union of India v. Rajiv Kumar ). It is urged that there was no settled position of law, on the construction of the applicable rules, that the learned Single Judge could rely on to quash the order of suspension without calling for any affidavit.

3. UPON this appeal being received, the operation of the impugned order was stayed on November 19,2008 and the stay continues till disposal of the appeal.

4. THE writ petitioner is governed by The West Bengal Primary education (Conduct of Se





























Click Here to Read the rest of this document

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top