Calcutta High Court (Appellete Side)
12771W/2010 on 26 April, 2011
Author: Dipankar Datta
Bench: Dipankar Datta
760
26.4.2011 W.P.C.R.C. 229 of 2010
IN
W.P.12771 (W) of 2010
Mr. Sakya Maity...for the Petitioner
Mrs. Sima Sengupta...for the Respondents
W.P. 12771 (W) of 2009 was disposed of on 5.8.2009 by me by granting liberty to the petitioner to approach the District Inspector of Schools (S.E.), Paschim Medinipur with a prayer for approval of his service as Headmaster of Tantigeria High School Post Office Vidyasagar University District Paschim Medinipur within a fortnight from date and if such approach is made, the said District Inspector shall proceed to consider and dispose of his prayer in accordance with law as also in the light of the decision of this Court dated 8.7.2009.
The petitioner duly approached the said District Inspector claiming approval of his service as Headmaster. However, the District Inspector did not consider his prayer in terms of the Court's order dated 5.8.2009 leading to filing of a petition for contempt (CPAN 1381 of 2009).
On 27.7.2009, Rule for Contempt was issued against the said District Inspector, being the contemnor/respondent. The Rule has since been listed before me for final hearing.
An affidavit has been filed by the contemnor/respondent pleading compliance of the Court's order dated 5.8.2009. It appears therefrom that the service of the petitioner as Headmaster of Tantigeria High School has been approved with effect from 1.8.2009 with all financial benefits as admissible under the grants-in-aid Rules 2 with effect from 11.8.2007, vide memo dated 22.12.2010, subject to ratification of the West Bengal Regional School Service Commission (Western Region), Bankura.
In connection with approval of appointment of one Shri Atanu Kumar Ghosh as Headmaster of Kanasole Junior High School with effect from 1.5.2008, the Secretary, West Bengal Regional School Service Commission, Bankura by memo dated 8.1.2011 has communicated to the said Shri Ghosh that in terms of the extant rules and regulations binding such Commission, there is no provision for ratification of approval/appointment and in such circumstances, it has "nothing to do about ratification" as sought for by him.
In view thereof, ratification of the petitioner's appointment/service by the Commission does not and cannot arise and, therefore, the said District Inspector shall proceed to release the financial benefits which the petitioner is entitled to in terms of the order dated 22.12.2010 without awaiting for ratification by the Commission. Financial benefits, if not already released, shall be released in favour of the petitioner as early as possible, but positively within a month from date of receipt of a copy of this order.
The Rule stands disposed of without costs.
Urgent certified photostat copy of this order if applied for, be supplied to the parties expeditiously.
(DIPANKAR DATTA,J.) 2