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

2024 Supreme(Cal) 1323

IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA
ANIRUDDHA ROY, J.
Tapan Kumar Sadar – Appellants
Versus
The State of West Bengal & Ors. – Respondents
W.P.A. 22595 of 2016
Decided on : 16-05-2024

Advocates:
Advocate Appeared:
For the Appellant : Mr. Himadri Barua, Mr. Biswajit Das
For the Respondent: Mr. Mrinal Kanti Ghosh

IMPORTANT POINT
The court established that inaction by educational authorities cannot deny a teacher's right to a higher pay scale when all procedural requirements have been met.

Headnote:

Education - Teacher's Pay Scale - West Bengal Act XIV of 2005, G.O. No. 548-SE(S) - The court emphasized the obligation of the District Inspector of Schools to grant prior permission for higher qualifications, ruling that the petitioner's rights were violated due to inaction by the authority.

Fact of the Case:

The petitioner, an Assistant Teacher, sought a higher pay scale after completing an M.Sc. in Zoology. The Managing Committee of the school had requested prior permission from the District Inspector of Schools, which was not acted upon, leading to the denial of the pay scale.

Finding of the Court:

The court found that the Managing Committee had complied with all necessary procedures to obtain prior permission, and the District Inspector's inaction was unjustified, leading to the conclusion that the petitioner was entitled to the higher pay scale.

Issues: Whether the petitioner was entitled to a higher pay scale despite the lack of prior permission from the District Inspector of Schools, and whether the inaction of the authority constituted a violation of the petitioner's rights.

Ratio Decidendi: The court held that the failure of the District Inspector to act on the Managing Committee's request for prior permission could not penalize the petitioner, as he had fulfilled all statutory obligations.

Result: The impugned order was quashed, and the respondent was directed to grant the higher pay scale to the petitioner.

JUDGMENT :

Aniruddha Roy, J.

1. This is a hearing matter upon direction of affidavits.

2. The registry note dated April 27, 2017 shows that despite there being direction on March 23, 2017, the respondents did not file affidavit-in-opposition.

3. Considering the long pendency of the writ petition since 2016 and considering the issue involved in the writ petition, this Court proceeds for its final disposal on the basis of the existing records.

4. Mr. Himadri Barua, learned counsel appears for the petitioner.

5. Mr. Mrinal Kanti Ghosh, learned State counsel appears for respondent Nos. 1 to 3.

Facts:

6. The petitioner claims to be an Assistant Teacher appointed on October 30, 1987 for the subject Bio-Science. The relevant subject of the petitioner is Zoology. At the time of appointment the petitioner was an Honours Graduate in Zoology with B.Ed. To enhance qualification the petitioner applied before the Managing Committee of the Basanti High School (H.S.), District 24 Parganas (South) (for short, the School). The Managing Committee of the school by its resolution dated June 26, 2001, annexure P-3 at page 32 to the writ petition, permitted the petitioner to undergo and to acquire higher qualification, M.Sc. (Zoology). The Managing Committee forwarded all documents before the respondent No. 3 immediately to grant prior permission in favour of the petitioner, annexure P-3 at page 33 to the writ petition. The said request of the Managing Committee of the school with all its documents was received by the office of the respondent No. 3 on July 23, 2002, as would be evident from the office endorsement made by the office of the respondent No. 3 on the face of the said document. The petitioner then submitted its representation dated October 10, 2002 before the Head Master of the school with regard to his claim for prior permission to undergo M.Sc.(Zoology), annexure P-4 at page 34 to the writ petition. The Managing Committee of the school under its resolution dated September 27, 2003, annexure P-5 at page 35 to the writ petition, duly approved the study leave for the relevant period. The Managing Committee under its resolution dated December 4, 2004, annexure P-8 at page 38 to the writ petition, agreed and approved to grant the petitioner Higher Pay Scale commensurating with his Post Graduation degree. The certificates of the relevant University annexure P-6 at pages 36 and 37 to the writ petition, respectively show that the date of commencement of the M.Sc Part –I was on July 18, 2003 and the publication of M.Sc. Part-II result on March 18, 2004. The school also represented by its letter dated December 15, 2005 before the respondent No. 3 to grant Higher Pay Scale to the petitioner commensurating with his Post Graduation degree, annexure P-9 at page 40 to the writ petition. There were several representations made by the school authority before the respondent No. 3 with a request to enhance the pay scale of the petitioner. The last representation was dated February 21, 2008, annexure P-12 at page 44 to the writ petition, submitted by the petitioner himself before the respondent No. 3.

7. In the above back drop, the previous writ petition W.P. 20523 (W) of 2008 was filed by the petitioner. The same was disposed of by a co-ordinate bench by an order dated September 9, 2008, annexure P-13 at page 45 to the writ petition, directing the respondent No. 3 to dispose of the representation of the petitioner by passing a reasoned order in the manner and mode directed therein.

8. Pursuant to the said direction in the previous writ petition the respondent No. 3 passed its reasoned order dated September 14/15, 2011, annexure P-14 at page 53 to the writ petition, rejecting the claim of the petitioner, inter alia, with the following finding:

    “The petitioner applied to school authority for enrolment of his name in the University and Managing Committee granted the same. But the School authority did not recommend the name of the petitioner for getting permission from

    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 telegram-icon
    whatsapp-icon Back to top