Calcutta High Court (Appellete Side)
Mijanur Rahaman Mondal vs The State Of West Bengal & Ors on 8 July, 2019
Author: Shampa Sarkar
Bench: Shampa Sarkar
1 08.07.2019
srm W.P. No. 10732 (W) of 2019 Mijanur Rahaman Mondal versus The State of West Bengal & Ors.
Ms. Sabnam Sultana ...for the Petitioner.
Mr. Prosenjit Mukherjee, Ms. Madhurima Sarkar ...for the Madrasah Service Commission.
Md. Galib, Mr. Safik Dewan ...for the State.
The petitioner was a successful candidate in the 6th SLST, 2013. The Examination was held on June 8, 2014. Pursuant to the leave granted by the Hon'ble Apex Court, the results were published on June 22, 2018. The petitioner's name was empanelled and he was called for counselling. At the time when the petitioner had applied and appeared for the recruitment process the D.L.Ed was not a mandatory qualification for the eligible teachers but a desirable one. The NCTE guidelines gave a relaxation to the teachers who did not complete the D.L.Ed course but to complete the same within two years from appointment. However, due to the pendency of the matter before the Hon'ble Apex Court with regard to the constitutional validity of the 2 West Bengal Madrasah Service Commission Act and Rules, the results were not published. Subsequently, leave was granted by the Hon'ble Apex Court on May 17, 2018 to publish the results only of the 6th SLST, 2013 examination. Thereafter the petiitoner was allowed to participate in the counselling being a successful candidate. In the meantime, the NCTE Rules, were amended and D.L.Ed/B.Ed was made a mandatory qualification and the same was also adopted by the Commission. Some successful candidates including the petitioner who were similarly situated moved a series of writ petitions before this Hon'ble Court seeking implementation of the results of the 6th SLST. The entire bunch of writ petitions were disposed of by a learned Single Judge of this Court by an order dated January 14, 2019. The ordering portion of the order referred to hereinabove is set out below:
"I make it clear that where the petitioners are found to have B.Ed qualification it would be held that they have appropriate qualification and thereby he will consider the prayer for appointment or recommendation for appointment of the petitioners subject to the result of the case pending before the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India. In case where only DLE qualification is possessed by the petitioners, the Chairman shall also consider whether they can be given an opportunity to upgrade the same within a certain period of time and if such upgradation is done whether to recommend them for such appointment subject to the result of the case before the Hon'ble Supreme Court. The entire exercise of consideration and disposing of the case of each of the petitioner shall be completed within a period of four weeks from the date of communication of this order 3 and communicate a reasoned order to the petitioners within a week thereafter.
The petitioners claim that all of them have called for counselling. Mr. Mukherjee, leaned Advocate for the Madrasah Service Commission admits that only some of the petitioners have called for counselling.
Be that as it may, those who have been called for counselling naturally should be considered to have been found eligible by the Madrasha Commission.
I make it clear that the question of whether Right to Education Act and the paraphernalia thereof can be made applicable to an educational institution which is established and managed by a religious minority group has not been decided by me in these petitions and are kept open to be agitated in future. The writ petitions are disposed of on the above terms."
Pursuant to the directions of this Court a reasoned order was passed by the Chairman, West Bengal Madrasah Service Commission on February 23, 2019. The relevant portion of the order is quoted below:
"Under the directions issued by the Hon'ble High Court at Calcutta, and upon perusal of all updated academic as well as professional records of said Mijanur Rahaman Mondal, I order him to take appropriate steps for fulfilling the relevant guidelines issued by the NCTE as detailed in the next paragraph. In terms of the above‐mentioned judgment of the Hon'ble High Court at Calcutta read with the G.O. bearing number F.No.61‐ 03/20/2010/NCTE/(NS) dated 23rd August 2010, 76‐ 4/2010/NCTE/Acad dated 11 February 2011 and F.N.o.NCTE‐ th Regl 012/16/2018 dated 28th June 2018; his registration for D.L.Ed have been recorded for future reference and he has been instructed to submit the passing certificate/marksheet to the Commission within a period of fifteen days from the date of declaration of the result of the last semester of the session, he had enrolled in .
Thus, the order dated 14.1.2019 of the Hon'ble High Court at Calcutta in W.P. No.15144 (W) of 2018 has been complied with."4
It is the contention of the petitioner that D.L.Ed course which the petitioner is pursuing will be completed within a year but in the meantime the petitioner should be given appointment because in the recruitment process by which the petitioner was appointed, D.L.Ed was not a mandatory qualification.
This point cannot be reopened at this stage in view of the fact that the petitioner has accepted the order passed by another Co‐ordinate Bench of this Court dated January 14, 201, by which His Lordship made it categorically clear that the Chairman should consider whether those petitioners who had enrolled in D.L.Ed course could be allowed to upgrade their qualification to D.L.Ed and then subsequently recommend them upon such upgradation. The petitioner has accepted this order and the same is binding on the petitioner. As such there cannot be any scope to direct the appointment of the petitioner at this stage.
Mr. Mukherjee, learned Advocate appearing on behalf of the Commission, submits that the petitioner is pursuing the D.L.Ed course and once the petitioner completes the D.L.Ed course necessary recommendation shall be given in accordance with law. 5
It is made clear that once the petitioner produces the pass certificate of the D.L.Ed course then the Chairman, West Bengal Madrasah Service Commission shall recommend the name of the petitioner in accordance with the Rules for appointment to a Madrasah.
This writ petition is, thus, disposed of.
There will be, however, no order as to costs. Urgent photostat certified copy of this order, if applied for, be given to the parties on priority basis.
(Shampa Sarkar, J.)