The retroactive application of circulars affecting employment engagement is impermissible without explicit legislative intent, ensuring the rights of the engaged party are preserved unless dissolved by statute.

JUDGMENT :

PARTHA SARATHI CHATTERJEE, J.

1. The present writ petition is an offshoot of a protracted legal battle in which the petitioner and the respondents have been locked since 2016, concerning the petitioner’s engagement as a para-teacher in Geography at Muldia Chaitanyapur Desgourab Vidyamandir (hereinafter referred to as ’the said school’).

2. To address the shortage of adequate teaching staff in the school and to ensure proper education for its students, the school initiated a selection process in the year 2004 to fill certain posts of para-teachers. Possessing the requisite qualifications, the petitioner submitted her candidature for the said post and, upon successful completion of the selection process, secured the first position in the panel prepared for the post of para-teacher in Geography.

3. However, owing to certain disputes which culminated in litigation, letters of engagement could not be issued to the selected candidate. Eventually, by a letter dated 29.09.2010, the petitioner was invited to join the post upon acceptance of the offer, pursuant to which the petitioner joined the school as a para-teacher in Geography on 04.10.2010.

4. In the meantime, the School Education Department (Primary Branch), Government of West Bengal, issued a circular dated 22.07.2010, directing that para-teachers who were already engaged were to continue until attaining the age of 60 years without renewal of their services.

5. The petitioner was denied such benefits. This denial prompted the petitioner to prefer a writ petition before this Hon’ble Court, being WP 115 (W) of 2016, which was disposed of by a Coordinate Bench of this Court by an order dated 11.01.2016 directing the petitioner to file a comprehensive representation within the time specified therein, with a further direction upon respondent no. 7 therein to decide on the petitioner’s claim for the benefit of the Circular dated 22.07.2010 and to determine whether the petitioner could avail herself of the online registration for the D.El.Ed Course. It is to be noted that, in the meantime, the respondents published another Notification requiring para-teachers to undergo two years of training under the D.El.Ed Course to enable them to teach students in a better manner. However, the benefit of that circular was limited to those para-teachers whose service had been recognized to continue up to the age of 60 years. The petitioner could not take any step for online registration of the D.El.Ed Course since her engagement was not allowed to continue till the age of 60 years.

6. In compliance with the order dated 11.01.2016, the petitioner submitted a comprehensive representation. However, upon receipt of such representation, the District Project Officer passed a reasoned order dated 04.03.2016 informing the petitioner that her letter of engagement issued by the school authority concerned was not considered for continuation as a para-teacher in the said School. Consequently, the petitioner was not eligible for online registration for the D.El.Ed Course.

7. The petitioner once again approached this Court by preferring another writ petition, being WP 21340 (W) of 2016, to challenge the order dated 04.03.2016. Record reveals that the said writ petition was disposed of by a Coordinate Bench of this Court by an order dated 10.11.2016, observing that there was no reason fo