19.01.2026 Ct. No. 11 rrc FMA 615 of 2020 (Prasanta Kanti Bose Vs. The State of West Bengal & Ors.)

Mr. Biswarup Biswas …. For the appellant Mr. Kartik Chandra Kapas …… For the State respondents

1. The present appeal has been preferred by Prasanta Kanti Bose (in short, Prasanta) challenging a judgment dated 11^th March, 2019 passed by the learned single Judge in a writ petition being WP No. 9112 (W) of 2013. The said writ petition was preferred praying for setting aside an order dated 30^th August, 2012 passed by the respondent no. 3 herein and to grant all consequential benefits.

2. The following facts are not in dispute. Prasanta, upon acquiring the qualification B.Sc. MP. Ed., participated in a selection process conducted by the West Bengal Regional School Service Commission (in short, Commission) for appointment to the post of assistant teacher in Physical Education. He emerged to be successful and was, accordingly, appointed in Bagdah High School and he joined the said post on 3rd February, 1999. Such appointment was also approved by the respondent no. 3 vide memo dated 23^rd March, 1999 and he enjoyed the post graduate scale of pay since then. Subsequently, for getting appointment in a school nearer to his residence, he again participated in a selection process conducted by the Commission in the year 1999. He emerged to be successful and was appointed to the post of assistant teacher with the qualification B.Sc. MP. Ed. at Ariadaha Sree Vidyaniketan High School on 14^th March, 2001. Such appointment was approved by the respondent no. 3 vide memo dated 25^th May, 2001 wherein the column towards ‘Scale of Pay’ was filled up stating ‘as per GA Rules’. In the said approval memo, it was also stated that Prasanta had opted for ‘pass degree holder in Physical Education’ and accordingly, Prasanta was paid the graduate scale of pay. Aggrieved thereby, Prasanta approached the writ Court praying for post graduate scale of pay and on the basis of a direction passed in the said writ petition, Prasanta’s claim was considered by the respondent no. 3 and his prayer was refused vide memo dated 30^th August, 2012. Aggrieved thereby, Prasanta preferred a writ petition being WP No. 9112 (W) of 2013 and the judgment delivered in the same had been impugned in the present appeal.

3. Records would reveal that by an order dated 20^th December, 2019, a coordinate Bench of this Court condoned the delay in preferring the appeal and disposed of the stay application with liberty to mention the matter after disposal of the reference pending before the Larger Bench in terms of the order of the Hon’ble Supreme Court dated 25^th July, 2019 passed in the case of Shohidullah Vs. The State of West Bengal & Ors.

4. Mr. Biswas, learned advocate appearing for the appellant submits that the dispute involved in the present case is no longer res integra and has been finally decided in the case of ‘Utpal Kanti Karan Vs. State of West Bengal & Ors.’, reported in 2024 SCC OnLine Cal 1274. The matter pending before the Hon’ble Supreme Court [Shohidullah (supra)] had already been disposed of in the light of the observations of the Special Bench judgment in the case of Utpal Kanti Karan (supra).

5. He further argues that a perusal of the judgment impugned would reveal that Prasanta’s claim was rejected on the rudiments of an erroneous observation that Prasanta’s qualification was not in the subject relevant to the group in which he was appointed. The learned single Judge observed, inter alia, that the qualification of Prasanta is B.Sc. MP. Ed., i.e., not a Master degree holder in a Science subject, but in a different stream, Physical Education. Such observation is erroneous inasmuch as Prasanta was appointed as an assistant teacher in Physical Education with post graduate degree in Physical Education and on the rudiments of such qualification in the earlier selection process conducted by the Commission, he was granted the post graduate scale of pay.

6. He further submits that in th