IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA CONSTITUTIONAL WRIT JURISDICTION APPELLATE SIDE Present:

The Hon’ble Justice Rai Chattopadhyay WPA 15199 of 2015 Kousik Chattaraj & Ors.

Vs.

State of West Bengal & Ors.

With WPA 14211 of 2015 Asit Baran Mondal & Anr.

Vs.

State of West Bengal & Ors.

For the Petitioner : Mr. Ekramul Bari, : Sk. Imtiaj Uddin, :

For the State Ms. Munmun Tewary : Ms. Sanchayita De … (in WPA 14211 of 2015)

: Mr. Kartick Chandra Kapas …(in WPA 15199 of 2015)

For the School Authority : Mr. Saibal Acharyya Heard on : 01.08.2025 Judgment on : 01.08.2025 Rai Chattopadhyay, J. :-

(1) The two writ petitions being No. WPA 14211 of 2015 and WPA 15199 of 2015, are analogous in nature, therefore, taken up for hearing together and are being disposed of by dint of the common judgment, as follows.

(2) An order of the respondent/Director of Mass Education Extension and E. O, Additional Secretary, MEE and LS Department, Government of West Bengal [herein after mentioned as the “Director of Mass Education”] dated December 9, 2014 and forwarded under cover of letter dated January 5, 2015, is under challenge in the instant writ petition. The said reasoned order was delivered by the respondent/Director of Mass Education, in terms of and compliance with the order of this Court dated September 17, 2014 in the writ petition W.P. No. 4950 (w) of 2011. The issue in dispute has been with regard to grant of approval of service of the petitioners in the instant cases.

(3) To state in brief, the petitioners were appointed on different dates between the period from the year 1993 to 2004, and since thereafter, they have been discharging their duties continuously and uninterruptedly. The institution was granted academic recognition on March 31, 2000 and government sponsorship on February 10, 2006. By virtue of a letter dated August 1, 2007, the Secretary of the said Institution requested the respondent/Director of Mass Education for grant of approval of the teaching and non-teaching staff of the said institution. Such prayer on behalf of the school authority was kept pending for an inordinate long period of time for which the petitioners had moved the previous writ petition, which was disposed of by the Court by dint of the order dated September 17, 2014. The Court had directed the said respondent to consider the prayer as above for approval of the petitioners. By dint of the said impugned order of the respondent, the prayer as above was considered and rejected. Hence, these writ petitions were filed, with the prayer for setting aside of the impugned order as above and for direction upon the respondent to approve the appointment of the petitioners.

(4) As regards the writ petitioner Shri Asit Baran Mondal in W.P.No. 14211 (w) of 2015, the respondent has held in the impugned order inter alia that in a pre-primary and primary level School, the minimum qualification as prescribed for an Assistant Teacher is Higher Secondary; that at the time of induction the writ petitioner was less qualified, not even having completed Madhyamik. It is stated that without having in position the basic required qualification, the said petitioner would not have been appointed in the post of an assistant teacher. Does the validity and legality of appointment of the petitioner is diminished at the threshold by the said respondent in the impugned order. For the reasons as cited above, the said respondent, in the said in order, has declined to grant approval of appointment of the petitioner, Shri Mondal.

(5) As regards the other writ petitioner Smt Purnima Dutta in W.P.No. 14211 (w) of 2015, the ground of rejection of prayer has been stated to be similar as that of Shri Mondal, that is being not adequately qualified to be appointed in the school.

(6) As regards the writ petitioner in W.P.No. 15199 (w) of 2015 namely Shri Kaushik Chattaraj, the finding of the said respondent is that he has joined at the institution on a date subsequent to the date of submission of the proposal for sponsorship