Authority lacks jurisdiction to retroactively disown approved appointments without due process, affirming the necessity of natural justice and protecting vested rights established through service.

JUDGMENT :

Rai Chattopadhyay, J.

1. The writ petitioner’s grievance is with regard to non-approval of his service in Nayabazar High School in the post of Clerk. In the instant writ petition he has challenged the decision of the District Inspector of Schools, Secondary Education, Dakshin Dinajpur vide his order dated July 22, 2011.

2. Facts remain that prior permission for filling up of the post of Clerk was obtained by the School Authority from the respondent No. 4/Additional District Inspector of Schools, Secondary Education, Gangarampur on July 9, 2008.

3. Hence, there was advertisement of vacancy published and interview held by the School Authority. The Selection Committee has thereafter prepared the panel, which was approved firstly by the Managing Committee of the School and ultimately by the said respondent No. 4 vide memo dated November 4, 2008. Pursuant to such approval, the petitioner was appointed and joined in the said school as a Clerk with effect from November 5, 2008.

4. Dispute arose in 2009 when the same respondent, that is, respondent No. 4/the Additional District Inspector of Schools, Secondary Education, Gangarampur, issued a letter dated September 23, 2009, observing inter alia that the prior permission and approval of panel for the post of Clerk (third vacancy) in the said School was done erroneously, due to wrong interpretation of the Government Notification No. 333-SE (Aptt.)/10M-32/01 Pt dated June 8, 2007 read with No. 2356 (20) GA. OM -15/2007 dated October 2, 2007. Therefore, by dint of the said letter dated September 23, 2009, the respondent No. 4 has directed the prior permission and approval of panel granted earlier in favour of the said School Authority to be treated as cancelled.

5. The petitioner being aggrieved,moved this Court challenging the said order dated September 23, 2009 of the respondent No. 4 in Writ Petition No. W.P. 14135 (W) of 2010. The Hon’ble Single Judge directed for consideration of the petitioner’s grievance by affording him an opportunity of hearing and specified in his order dated July 30, 2010 that excepting the point of breach of natural justice no other points on merit were decided by the Court by dint of the said order. This order of the Hon’ble Single Judge was turned down by the Appeal Court. The Appeal Court has directed in its order dated March 23, 2011 that any genuine error in the order of granting prior permission as well as approval of panel may be brought to the notice of the Authority concerned as well as to the present writ petitioner and necessary steps may be taken in terms of law after giving him an opportunity of hearing. The Division Bench directed that till the time a decision is taken by the respondent Authority the petitioner should function as a Clerk as against applicable salary and other emoluments.

6. The decision in terms of the Court’s order as above has come into effect in the form of the impugned order dated July 22, 2011, which is challenged in the instant writ petition. The District Inspector of Schools, Secondary Education, Dakshin Dinajpur has turned down the veracity and propriety of the permission for giving appointment to the post of a Clerk in the said School, in which the writ petitioner has been appointed subsequently, and approval granted to the panel at a later point of time as erroneous and not maintainable for the reason that the school did not have a sanctioned post of Clerk (third vacancy) in the said school.

7. Mr. Bari, learned Advocate for the writ petitioner has submitted two fold. Firstly, that the respondent No. 4 after according permission for appointment to the particular post and approval of panel cannot by