Sahidullah Munshi, J.

This writ application has been filed challenging a memo being No.11/G dated 16th January, 2006 issued by the District Inspector of Schools, Secondary Education, Malda, whereby the District Inspector of Schools, while giving a decision in respect of grant of approval to the panel for the post of clerk of Mitna High School, has also cancelled the same. In brief, the petitioner’s case is as follows:

Owing to the vacancy in the post of clerk at Mitna High School, Director of School Education sanctioned the post of clerk at Mitna High School, P.O. Talsur, district Malda by his memo No.S19/1(19) SC.14 dated 1st February, 2001. After the sanction of the post, an interview was held on 21st September, 2003 for recruitment of a clerk wherein the petitioner stood first and, accordingly, a panel was prepared by the Selection Committee. After the Selection Committee prepared the panel, the same was forwarded by the Managing Committee of the school to the District Inspector of Schools, Malda for its approval on 1st October, 2003. The panel, however, being not considered by the District Inspector of Schools (S.E.) Malda, a representation was made to the District Inspector of Schools by the petitioner on 13th November, 2003 and requested for grant of approval to the said panel. The Secretary of School, however, also made a representation on 15th December, 2003 but to no effect. The petitioner moved a writ petition being W.P. No.1339(W) of 2004 and in pursuance of an order passed by this Hon’ble Court, the District Inspector of Schools (S.E.) Malda, passed the impugned order on 16th January, 2006 thereby rejecting the prayer for approval of the panel for the post of clerk and, consequently, rejected the panel itself. The said order of rejection has been communicated by the District Inspector of Schools to the petitioner.

Aggrieved by the said order of rejection issued by the District Inspector of Schools the petitioner has come up with the present writ petition and has prayed for necessary orders to set aside the impugned order dated 16th January, 2006 passed by the District Inspector of Schools (S.E.) Malda.

A supplementary affidavit, affirmed on 17th November, 2014, has been filed in Court in order to bring on record a memo dated 1st November, 2001 to show that the post was sanctioned by the Director of School Education. The supplementary affidavit has been taken on record. While passing the impugned order the District Inspector of Schools has observed that the panel cannot be approved because the recruitment process was conducted without following the recruitment rules and that no prior permission was obtained by the school authority. Therefore, the panel which was prepared, cannot be sustained. To contradict the said stand taken by the District Inspector of Schools the learned advocate for the petitioner submits that from the supplementary affidavit it will appear that the Director of School Education sanctioned the post and since the District Inspector of Schools is placed higher to the rank of District Inspector of Schools, no further permission of the District Inspector of Schools is required to be obtained before holding the interview and preparing the panel. The learned advocate for the petitioner has cited a few decisions to argue that recruitment rules are only guidelines issued by the Department of Education and infraction of those guidelines would not tantamount to violation of the rules because these guidelines are only directory in nature and violation thereof does not entail any penal consequence and if it does not entail any penal consequence non-compliance of the said guidelines does not vitiate the recruitment process. According to him, even without prior permission being obtained from the District Inspector of Schools the panel which has been prepared can validly stand and the District Inspector of Schools should have approved the same instead of rejecting the prayer for approval. The first de