08.08.2025 11 Ct.No.7 as WPA No. 26005 of 2023 Kumaresh Sarkar Vs. The State of West Bengal & Ors. Mr. Pankaj Halder Mr. Sanatan Panja Mr. Bidish Ghosh .…for the petitioner Mr. Arindam Chattopadhyay Ms. Lipika Chatterjee .…. for the State The present writ petition is filed praying for the issuance of an appropriate writ, order, or direction, more particularly a writ in the nature of mandamus, commanding the concerned respondents to forthwith release the outstanding arrears of salary, along with the interest accrued thereon, for the periods from 1st May, 1997 to 30th April, 2000, and from 1st November, 2003 to 31st October, 2008, which, according to the petitioner, have been unjustly withheld. Mr. Halder, learned Advocate appearing on behalf of the petitioner, submits that the petitioner was appointed as organizing teacher at Alipara Ambedkar Siksha Niketan Junior High School, situated in the District of South 24 Parganas (hereinafter referred to as "the school"), in the year 1986. The said school was granted initial recognition by the West Bengal Board of 2 Secondary Education (hereinafter referred to as "the Board") up to Class VIII with effect from 1st May, 1997. Subsequently, by virtue of an order dated 31st March, 2000 passed by a Co-ordinate Bench of this Hon’ble Court in W.P. No. 9467(W) of 1999, the petitioner’s appointment was duly approved by the District Inspector of Schools with effect from 1st May, 1997. However, the financial benefits arising from such approval were directed to be extended only with effect from 31st March, 2000. Meanwhile, certain individuals filed a writ petition, W.P. No. 17062(W) of 2002, taking the plea that they were the original organizing teachers and non- teaching staff of the school. By an interlocutory order passed in that writ petition, the payment of salary in favour of the petitioner and other teachers of the school, whose appointments were approved by the District Inspector of Schools with effect from 1st May, 1997, was stopped. However, the writ petition was subsequently disposed of without passing any order on merit. Mr. Halder, learned Advocate for the petitioner, further submits that the interim order passed in W.P. No. 17062(W) of 2002 stood merged with the final judgment, and as the Co-ordinate Bench did not find any merit in the claim advanced by certain individuals asserting themselves to be the original organizing 3 teaching and non-teaching staff, no relief was granted in their favour. It is submitted that the petitioner retired from service upon attaining the age of superannuation on 31st January, 2007. Mr. Halder submits that the school in question was subsequently de-recognized with effect from 1st October, 2014. However, the concerned respondents discontinued the disbursement of salary to the teaching and non-teaching staff of the school, including the petitioner, on the ground that they were restrained from making such payments pursuant to an interim order passed in W.P. No. 17062(W) of 2002. The action of withholding the salary of the teachers was challenged by one of the affected teachers, namely Dinabandhu Purkait, by filing a writ petition being WPA 24103(W) of 2018. Mr. Halder further submits that a Co-ordinate Bench of this Hon’ble Court, while disposing of this writ petition, held that the school in question continued to function as a recognized institution until 30th September, 2014. Accordingly, the Bench directed the concerned respondents to release the arrear salary to those teachers who had served in the said school up to 30th September, 2014 and were subsequently absorbed in another school following the derecognition of Alipara Ambedkar Siksha Niketan Junior High School. 4 Mr. Halder further submits that, in view of the aforesaid decision rendered by a Co-ordinate Bench of this Hon’ble Court, the issue now stands conclusively settled. However, in the present case, arrears of salary and retirement benefits have not been released in favour of the petitioner, thereby raising a question as to whether the school had received further recognition. He submits that this issue has already been settled by the order dated 21.06.2023 passed in WPA 24103(W) of 2018. He informs the Court that the petitioner’s provident fund has been released. Mr. Halder submits that the petitioner is approximately 78 years old and is presently bed-ridden. He, therefore, prays that the petitioner's authorised representative be permitted to take all necessary steps and receive the benefits on behalf of the petitioner. Mr. Chattopadhyay, learned Advocate representing the State, submits a copy of a report and opposes the contention advanced by the petitioner. Heard the learned Advocates representing the respective parties. The record reveals that the petitioner was appointed as organizing teacher of the school in the year 1986. The school was granted initial recognition by the West Bengal Board of Secondary Education with effect from 1st May, 1997. Although the petitioner’s appointment was approved retrospectively from 1st May, 1997, the financial benefits arising therefrom were 5 directed to be extended only with effect from 31st March, 2000. A Co-ordinate Bench of this Hon’ble Court also had the occasion to consider the issue regarding the date from which the organizing teachers and non- teaching staff of the said school would be entitled to receive their salary and other service-related benefits. Upon due consideration, the Bench concluded that such teachers and non-teaching staff were entitled to receive their salary and all consequential service-related benefits from the date the school was granted recognition. As noted earlier, certain individuals claiming to be the original organizing teachers and non-teaching staff of the school filed a writ petition being W.P. No. 17062(W) of 2002. A Co-ordinate Bench of this Hon’ble Court, by way of an interlocutory order, directed the concerned respondents not to release any salary or service-related benefits to the teachers and non- teaching staff of those schools whose appointments had been approved. However, the interlocutory order was ultimately merged with the final order, and no direction was issued restraining the concerned respondents from disbursing salary or extending service-related benefits to the teachers and non-teaching staff of schools that had received recognition. In the present case, the petitioner retired from service on 31st October, 2008, 6 upon attaining the age of superannuation. It is evident, therefore, that during the petitioner’s period of service, the school was functioning as a duly recognized institution. As noted earlier, Mr. Haldar submits that the concerned respondent refused to release the arrears of salary and retirement benefits in favour of the petitioner raising a question whether the school received further recognition. The school was de- recognized w.e.f. 1.10.2014. A Coordinate Bench of this Court in its order dated 21.06.2023 passed in WPA 24103(W) of 2018 has observed that the school continued to function as a recognized school till 30th September, 2014. The State has not challenged the order dated 21.06.2023. In view of the foregoing, I find no justifiable reason for the respondents to withhold the payment of arrears of salary to the petitioner and retirement benefits to the petitioner. Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of by directing the District Inspector of Schools to release the petitioner’s arrear salary for the periods from 1st May, 1997 to 30th April, 2000, and from 1st November, 2003 to 31st October, 2008, along with interest accrued thereon at the rate of 8% per annum, to be calculated from the date the salary fell due until the date of actual disbursement, to release all retirement benefits to the petitioner. 7 Taking note of the fact that the petitioner is approximately 78 years of age and is presently bed- ridden, the respondents are directed to release the arrears of salary for the period mentioned in the foregoing paragraphs, along with the retirement benefits, as admissible, positively within the time specified in this order to the authorized representative of the petitioner. Entire exercise shall be completed within a period of six weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. With these observations and order, the writ petition is, thus, disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs. (Partha Sarathi Chatterjee, J.)