Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 0, Cited by 1]

Calcutta High Court (Appellete Side)

Ac Laxmi Chhetri vs State Of West Bengal & Ors on 26 March, 2012

Author: Harish Tandon

Bench: Harish Tandon

                                                 1


Sl/   26.3.12                         W.P. 2584 (W) of 2012
28
ac                                                    Laxmi Chhetri
                                                            -vs-
                                                     State of West Bengal & Ors

                Mr. Ashok Kumar Janah
                Mr. K.D. Das
                Mr. Gautam Dinda
                Mrs. Pampa Dey
                Mrs. Ina Bhattacharya                              ... For Petitioner

                Mr. Abdul Momen                                    ... For Respondents
No. 1, 2 and 5

Vakalatnama filed today on behalf of respondents no. 1, 2 and 5 be kept with the record.

The petitioner claims to have been appointed by the Managing Committee to Kurseong Adarsha Vidhyalaya (Higher Secondary School) in the district of Darjeeling on volunteer basis with effect from 1st September 2007. The petitioner thereafter made a prayer to the respondent no. 5 for granting post-facto approval of her appointment as against sanctioned posts.

The authority did not consider the said representation and has kept the same in abeyance.

The petitioner prayed for consideration of his prayer for approval of her appointment by the State/respondents in this writ petition.

Mr. Ganguly, learned Advocate appearing for the State, however, vehemently opposes the instant writ petition in contending that no relief could be given to the petitioner as he does not accrue any right to be appointed as such.

Be that as it may, the State/respondent has 2 not taken any decision and this Court expects that the authority cannot keep the representation in suspended animation for all time t o come.

Respondent no. 5 is, therefore, directed to consider the representation, being Annexure P-5 to the writ petition, within six weeks from the date of communication of this order, in accordance with law. The authority shall communicate such decision to the Secretary of the said School within a week from the date of passing the said order.

Since this Court had no occasion to consider the merit of the said representation, the Authority shall be free to take decision without being influenced by any observation, if any, made herein.

It is further made clear that since affidavits have not been called for, allegations made in this writ application shall be deemed not to have been accepted by the respondents.

The writ petition is, thus, disposed of. There will be no order as to costs.

Urgent photostat certified copy be supplied to the parties, if applied for, on priority basis.

(Harish Tandon, J.)