Calcutta High Court (Appellete Side)
Of North India & Ors vs State Of West Bengal & Ors on 17 May, 2012
Author: Jyotirmay Bhattacharya
Bench: Jyotirmay Bhattacharya
1
17.05.2012. W. P. No. 6593 (W) of 2012
with
CAN 3268 of 2012
with
CAN 3269 of 2012
Diocese of Durgapur, Church
of North India & Ors.
versus
State of West Bengal & Ors.
Mr. Sanjoy Kumar Baid,
Mr. Arnab Chakraborty ... For the Petitioners.
Mr. Kamalendu Ghosh,
Mr. Raja Ghosh ... For the State-Respondents.
Mr. Rezaul Hossain ... For the Respondent No.3.
Mr. Amal Baran Chattjerjee, Mr. Satadal Chatterjee, Mr. Malay Bhattacharya ... For the Applicant in Both the Applications.
Re: CAN 3268 of 2012 & CAN 3269 of 2012 These two applications have been filed by two applicants, inter alia, praying for their addition as respondents in this writ petition. In one of such applications being CAN 3269 of 2012, the suspended Headmaster of Bankura Christian Collegiate School has prayed for his addition as respondent in this writ petition. In the other application being CAN 3268 of 2012, an Assistant Teacher, viz., Uday Mahapatra has prayed for his addition as respondent in this writ petition.
Since both of them are interested in the administration of the said school so far as the academic interest of the 2 students of the said institution is concerned, this Court feels that the presence of those applicants is necessary for effective and complete adjudication of the dispute involved in this writ petition. Accordingly, the applications for addition of party being CAN 3268 of 2012 and CAN 3269 of 2012 stand allowed.
Let the applicants of those two applications be added as respondent nos. 6 and 7 to this writ petition.
The learned advocate-on-record of the petitioners is directed to add those applicants as respondent nos. 6 and 7 to this writ petition by amending the cause title of this writ petition.
The petitioners are directed to serve a copy of the writ petition upon Mr. Chatterjee, learned advocate who represents both the applicants in those two applications in course of this week.
Re: W.P.No. 6593 (W) of 2012 After hearing the learned advocates of the parties and after considering the materials on record, this Court feels that the dispute which is involved in this writ petition is required to be considered after exchange of affidavits between the parties.
Accordingly, leave is granted to the respondents to file affidavit-in-opposition to this writ petition within three weeks after reopening of the Court after the Summer Vacation; reply, if any, be filed by the petitioners within a week thereafter.
3Let this matter appear in the list for hearing four weeks after reopening of the Court after the Summer Vacation under the heading "Hearing".
Let me now consider the petitioners' prayer for an interim order regarding completion of selection process for filling up the post of five Assistant Teachers in the said school.
Admittedly prior permission has been granted by the concerned District Inspector of Schools for filling up those five posts of Assistant Teachers in the said school. Prior permission which was so granted by the concerned District Inspector of Schools has not been withdrawn.
Considering the academic interest of the students of the said Institution which is a prime consideration and also by taking note of fact that the school exists for the academic interest of the students, this Court feels that those posts of Assistant Teachers should not be kept vacant even during the pendency of the writ petition.
As such this Court feels that the selection process should be completed as early as possible. However, certain allegations have been made regarding constitution of the Selection Committee because of inclusion of the Teacher-in- Charge in the Selection Committee, as the person who was appointed as Teacher-in-Charge, according to the added respondents, did not have the requisite qualification for being appointed as Teacher-in-Charge in the school, but this Court, prima facie, does not find any illegality in his inclusion in the said Selection Committee, as he had the requisite qualification for being appointed as an Assistant Teacher in the said school 4 and no special qualification is prescribed for appointment of Teacher-in-Charge of the said school.
Under such circumstances, this Court permits the school authority to complete the selection process and fill up the said posts with this rider that the appointment of those teachers in those five posts will ultimately abide by the result of the writ petition.
It is made clear that while issuing the appointment letter, the school authority will indicate therein about the pendency of the writ petition and their appointment will be subject to the result of the writ petition.
(JYOTIRMAY BHATTACHARYA, J.) dc.