Nikhilesh Upadhyay vs The State Of West Bengal & Ors on 14 May, 2018

[Cites 1, Cited by 0]

Calcutta High Court

Nikhilesh Upadhyay vs The State Of West Bengal & Ors on 14 May, 2018

Bench: Shekhar B. Saraf

OD- 4
                             ORDER SHEET

                            WP 30 of 2018
                    IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA
                  Constitutional Writ Jurisdiction
                            ORIGINAL SIDE


                         NIKHILESH UPADHYAY
                               VERSUS
                  THE STATE OF WEST BENGAL & ORS.



    BEFORE:
    The Hon'ble JUSTICE SHEKHAR B. SARAF
    Date : 14TH MAY, 2018.



                                                          Appearance:
                                         Mr. Anjan Bhattacharya, Adv.
                                                 Ms. Anita Shaw, Adv.
                                                   For the petitioner

                                              Mr. Sakti Pada Jana, Adv.
                                               For the School Authority

                                       Mr. Sirsanya Bandopadhya, Adv.
                                            Ms. Tapati Samantta, Adv.
                                                        For the State




        The Court: This is an application under Article 226

of the Constitution of India wherein the writ petitioner is

aggrieved   by    the    action   of    the    school     authorities   in

stopping    him   from   resuming      his    work   as   an   unapproved

teacher from January, 2018.The petitioner submits that he

has been working since 2013 and taking classes for class V
 to   XII.     It    is   his    submission   that   he    had    a    valid   and

regular       routine      for     taking    classes      and     the      school

authorities treated him like a temporary teacher and even

deposited provident fund on his behalf.


        Counsel on behalf of the respondent authority submits

that the writ petitioner was never ever a temporary teacher also and was allowed to take classes only to filling gaps as and when they occur. It is their submissions that the rules for Management of Recognized Non-Government Institutions (Aided and Unaided), 1969 does not contemplate the case of the writ petitioner.

The petitioner submits that his letter of January 11, 2018 has not even been replied to by the school authorities. It is his submission that after having working for a period of five years, he is being treated in such a rancid manner.

This Court feels that the minimum right the writ petitioner has is to receive a reply to his letter dated 11th January, 2018, and I, accordingly direct the school authorities to reply to the letter of the petitioner within a period of three weeks from date.

With the above directions, writ petition is disposed of.

(SHEKHAR B. SARAF, J) A Dey

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

Calcutta High Court