OD-1 ORDER SHEET WPO/409/2019 IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Constitutional Writ Jurisdiction ORIGINAL SIDE RAKESH KUMAR JOSHI VS THE STATE OF WEST BENGAL & ORS. BEFORE: The Hon'ble JUSTICE RAI CHATTOPADHYAY Date : 22nd April, 2025. Appearance: Mr. Anjan Bhattacharya, Adv. Ms. Anita Shaw, Adv. …for the petitioner Mr. Saktipada Jana, Adv. ..for the School The Court: The petitioner is a master degree qualified Assistant Teacher in the subject English who also has B.Ed. qualification. The petitioner imparts education in the Higher Secondary section of the school. The school is a DA getting school in which the petitioner has been serving since July 14, 2007. Therefore, the petitioner intends to be approved in the said school, which prayer of the petitioner has been turned down by the District Inspector of Schools, Secondary Education, Kolkata, by dint of his order dated July 26, 2019. The order of the District Inspector of Schools, Secondary Education, Kolkata dated July 26, 2019 is under challenge in the instant writ petition. Mr. Bhattacharya appearing for the petitioner has vehemently raised objection as to the grounds cited by the District Inspector of Schools, 2 Secondary Education, Kolkata in his order dated July 26, 2019. He says that the grounds cited therein are unsubstantiated by the relevant data and facts. According to him, instead, the relevant data and facts, as available in this case, would suggest that the petitioner shall be entitled for being approved as against the vacant sanctioned post in the Higher Secondary section of the said school for the subject English. Mr. Jana is representing the school. Mr. Jana has submitted that since after filing of this writ petition, sufficient time has been elapsed, by dint of which many of the teachers have retired. Therefore, he seeks that the matter may be considered afresh by the competent authority in the light of the present day circumstances. No one is appearing for the State respondents. It appears that the petitioner, who is a M.A., B.Ed. qualified Assistant Teacher, was appointed in the respondent D.A. getting school with effect from July 14, 2007 and since thereafter, the petitioner has been imparting teaching in classes XI and XII, in the Higher Secondary section of the said school. After careful consideration of the impugned order dated July 26, 2019, it appears that the D.I. has rejected the petitioner’s prayer for approval on the ground that as per the sanctioned strength of teaching staff, there would not be any requirement for another teacher to be approved in the Higher Secondary section of the said school, since the school as on the said date already had seven teachers in total imparting teaching in the normal, as well as in the Higher Secondary sections. The D.I. in the impugned order has mentioned that one approved Assistant Teacher is 3 working in the Higher Secondary section, whereas six teachers are imparting teaching in the normal section of the school. On the basis of the said facts, the D.I. has held that there is no teacher required to teach English in the said school in the Higher Secondary section. On perusal of the documents annexed with the writ petition, it is, however, found that there are three unapproved teachers imparting teaching in the school in the Higher Secondary section, amongst whom only the petitioner has the requisite qualification of Masters degree along with B.Ed. degree. The record has further revealed that there are two sanctioned posts of teachers in the Higher Secondary section of the school in the subject English as per the staff pattern, subject-wise. The fact remains that the other two teachers who are imparting teaching in the subject English in Higher Secondary section lack requisite training qualification unlike the present petitioner. The Court finds that in the impugned order the District Inspector of Schools has failed to consider the aspect that the petitioner is duly qualified with Masters degree in the relevant subject English including B.Ed. degree. It is further found that the D.I. in the impugned order has also not considered the number of sanctioned post in the Higher Secondary section of the said school, which is two. Therefore, the fact that the petitioner could have been considered for approval in the Higher Secondary section, on the basis of his qualification as mentioned above and the sanctioned post in Higher Secondary section in the school, has escaped attention of the D.I., while issuing the order as impugned in this case. 4 In such circumstances, the Court finds that the order of the D.I. dated July 26, 2019 is based on inappropriate facts and surmises thereby permitting the said office to come to a wrong decision as regards the eligibility of the petitioner and requirement for his approval as the subject teacher in the Higher Secondary section of the said school. On the findings as above, the impugned order dated July 26, 2019 of the District Inspector of Schools, Secondary Education, Kolkata cannot stand and the same is liable to be set aside. In such circumstances, WPO/409/2019 is allowed and disposed of with the following directions:- i. The impugned order dated July 26, 2019 of the District Inspector of Schools, Secondary Education, Kolkata is set aside. ii. The respondent no. 2/ The Commissioner of School Education, School Education Department, Government of West Bengal is directed to take up the prayer of the writ petitioner for approval and consider the same in the light of the attending facts and circumstances, including the qualification of the petitioner, which is consisted with the training qualification vide a B.Ed. degree alongside the Masters degree qualification of him and the present day vacancy position of the said school. The said respondent shall pass a reasoned order as regards the prayer of the petitioner for approval in service, if not such prayer of him is immediately granted by the said respondent. iii. In doing so, the said respondent shall allow the writ petitioner and the school authority an adequate and reasonable 5 opportunity of hearing and dispose of the entire exercise, as above, within a period of four weeks from the date of communication of a copy of this order. iv. Needless is to mention that after considering the prayer of the petitioner for approval and affording him an opportunity of hearing, if the said respondent finds the petitioner to be a duly eligible for being approved, immediate necessary action shall be undertaken by the said respondent authority. Urgent certified photocopies of this order, if applied for, be supplied to the parties subject to compliance with all requisite formalities. (RAI CHATTOPADHYAY, J.) sg.