09.07.2026 Sl. Nos.311& 312 Ct. No.14 ss/srm IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA CONSTITUTIONAL WRIT JURISDICTION APPELLATE SIDE W.P.A. No.14606 of 2026 Md. Asif Rahman versus The State of West Bengal & Ors. With W.P.A. 15052 of 2026 Md. Zahidul Islam & anr. Versus West Bengal Board of Madrasah Education & ors. Mr. Ekramul Bari Mr. Siddhartha Sankar Mondal Ms. Sharmistha Dhar … for the petitioner in WPA 14606 of 2026 and respondent no.6 in WPA 15052 of 2026 Ms. Sanghamitra Nandy …for the petitioners in WPA 15052 of 2026 and respondent nos.10 to 14 of WPA 14606 of 2026 Mr. Nadeem Sulaiman Mr. Mijanur Kabir … for the Madrasah Board Mr. D. N. Ray, Ld. G.P. Mr. Brijendra Pratap Singh Mr. Rhitam Chatterjee … for the State 1. Affidavits of service filed on behalf of the petitioners in both the writ petitions are taken on record. 2. Since both the writ petitions pertain to the same Madrasah namely, Dariapur Baishi High Madrasah (H.S.), Malda (hereinafter referred to as „the said Madrasah‟) and issues involved in both the writ petitions are similar, hence both are taken up analogously for consideration. 2 3. In WPA 14606 of 2026 (in short, „WP-I‟) the petitioner seeks direction upon the respondent nos.2 to 7 to immediately take steps ensuring that the petitioner is allowed to resume and continue to discharge his lawful duties and functions as Assistant Headmaster/Teacher-in-Charge (in short „TIC‟) and also to declare the purported resolution allegedly adopted in the meeting of the Managing Committee dated 20th June, 2026 to be illegal and arbitrary. 4. In WPA 15052 of 2026 (in short, „WP-II‟) the petitioners have sought for direction upon the respondent authorities to take appropriate legal steps against the private respondent no.6 for misappropriation of fund of the said Madrasah to the tune of Rs.1,61,46,957/- and direct the District Inspector of Schools (SE), Malda to grant permission to petitioner no.1 to act as TIC of the said Madrasah. 5. The petitioner in WP-I contends that he is an approved Assistant Headmaster of the said Madrasah. Since there is no Headmaster in the said Madrasah at the present, by dint of his post the petitioner discharged his function as TIC of the said Madrasah. However, all on a sudden, by resolution dated 20th June, 2026 the petitioner has been removed from the post of TIC and most arbitrarily and illegally the private respondent no.10, Md. Zahidul Islam, who is an Assistant Teacher in the said Madrasah, has been appointed as TIC by the Managing Committee. 3 Challenging such action of the Managing Committee the petitioner has preferred the writ petition, WP-I. 6. The petitioners in WP-II contend that such removal of Md. Asif Rahman, Assistant Headmaster has been done since while discharging functions as TIC, he has defalcated huge sum of money allotted to the said Madrasah to the tune of Rs.1,61,46,957/-.The erstwhile TIC upon such defalcation has no authority to continue and discharge his functions as TIC of the said Madrasah. With the permission of the police function authorities the documents which were kept in the almirah of the erstwhile TIC have been taken into custody upon appointment of the new TIC for smooth functioning of the said Madrasah. 7. Mr. Ekramul Bari, learned Advocate appearing on behalf of the petitioner in WP-I submits that as per the settled proposition of law, in the absence of regular Head Master/Head Mistress in the institution, the approved Assistant Head Master/Head Mistress automatically becomes the TIC by dint of his post as per Government norms and regulation. The petitioner being the approved Assistant Head Master of the said Madrasah is the appropriate person to discharge the function of TIC and none else. In support of his contention, he relies on the following decisions (i) Alauddin -versus- The State of West Bengal & ors. (In re: WP 4127 (W) of 2013); (ii) Baijid Hossain - versus- State of West Bengal & ors. (In re: WPA 4 9239 of 2022) and the related appeal passed in The Teacher In Charge, Dhuliyan High Madrasah (H.,S.) & another -versus- The State of West Bengal & others (In re: MAT 1221 of 2022). He also relies on a notification of the School Education Department dated 4th July, 2018 in support of his contention. The action of the Managing Committed in removing the petitioner as TIC is de hors the existing rules and is arbitrary. No such allegation of defalcation of money against the petitioner in WP-I was ever raised before any authority till he was removed on 20th June, 2026. He seeks that the petitioner in WP-I be allowed to resume his duties as TIC upon declaring the resolution dated 20th June, 2026 of the Managing Committee as void. 8. On the contrary, Ms. Sanghamitra Nandy, learned Advocate appearing on behalf of the petitioners in WP-II and respondent nos.10 to 14 in WP-I, submits that there is serious allegation of defalcation of money against Md. Asif Rahman, the petitioner in WP-I, who was the erstwhile TIC. In relation to defalcation of money, resolution was adopted unanimously by the members of the Managing Committee on 20th June 2026 for removal of Md. Asif Rahman from the post of TIC. Such decision has been taken by the Managing Committee for the better administration of the said Madrasah. Further the notification dated 4th July, 2018 relied upon by the petitioner in WP-I is a 5 notification issued by the School Education Directorate, Government of West Bengal which does not apply to Madrasah. Moreover, in the meantime, on 1st July, 2026 a Drawing and Disbursing Officer (DDO) has been appointed by the District Inspector of Schools (SE), Malda vide Memo No.972/G/MLD/SE dated 1st July, 2026 and therefore, in such circumstances there is no requirement for any TIC to function in the said Madrasah. Hence the prayer in WP-I has become redundant. She seeks that specific orders be passed by this Court for enquiry into defalcation of money by the petitioner in WP-I, Md. Asif Rahman. 9. Mr. Nadeem Sulaiman, learned Advocate representing the West Bengal Board of Madrasah Education submits that in the absence of Head Master, the Assistant Teacher is supposed to discharge the functions of TIC as per existing rules. The Assistant Teacher has no authority to discharge the functions as TIC when there is an Assistant Head Master in the said Madrasah. The petitioner no.1 in WP-II is an Assistant Teacher and not the Assistant Head Master and hence cannot Act as TIC in the present scenario. Therefore, under no circumstances, he could have been appointed as TIC by the Managing Committee. Moreover, the appointment of Md. Zahidul Islam as TIC has not been approved by the concerned District Inspector of Schools. 6 10. In reply to the submissions advanced on behalf of the petitioners in WP-II, Mr. Bari, learned Advocate for the petitioner in WP-I submits that since the appointment of Md. Zahidul Islam has not been approved by the concerned authority, he cannot discharge the function of TIC as on date. 11. Ms. Nandy, learned Advocate for the petitioner in WP- II informs this Court that already letter of communication has been issued by the Managing Committee to the concerned department seeking for approval of the petitioner in WP-II to act as TIC. 12. Upon hearing the learned Advocates for the respective parties, following issues fall for consideration: (i) Whether the decision taken by the Managing Committee vide its resolution dated 20th June, 2026 for removal of the petitioner in WP-I as TIC is sustainable in law? (ii) Whether the petitioner in WP-II can be allowed to continue as TIC of the said Madrasah in the facts and circumstances of the case? 13. Both the aforesaid issues being interlinked are taken up together for consideration. 14. It is not in dispute that the said Madrasah at present does not have any Headmaster. The petitioner in WP-I is the approved Assistant Headmaster. Now the question which is to be examined, at this juncture, is whether in the presence of an Assistant Headmaster, an Assistant teacher can be appointed as TIC. In 7 order to examine the above question it would be profitable to reproduce the observations of this court in this regard in the following decisions. 14.1 In the decisions of Alauddin (supra), a Co-ordinate Bench of this Court held as follows. “It further appears from the materials on record that the petitioner was appointed as Assistant Headmaster of the school in question. He has been discharging his function in the above post with effect from January 24, 2006. On the basis of the settled principles of law as decided in the matter of Smt. Kanak Pal vs. The State of West Bengal & Ors. reported in (2002) 1 Cal LT 370(HC), the petitioner has the legally enforceable right to be appointed as Teacher‐in‐Charge of the school under reference. The relevant portions of the above decision are set out below: “3. According to me, the post of Assistant Headmaster Assistant Head Mistress cannot be equal with the post of Assistant Teacher. The post of Assistant Headmaster/Assistant Headmistress is a post in association with the administration vis‐à‐vis the teaching of the institution like the post of Headmaster/Head‐mistress but unlike the post of Assistant Teacher. If the Headmaster/Headmistress absented himself/herself from attending the School due to ill health or for any other contingency then obviously such Assistant Headmaster/Assistant Headmistress will discharge the functions of the Institution on his/her behalf. Therefore, it can be construed on the basis of such illustration that Assistant Headmaster/Assistant Headmistress has a right to run the administration for a temporary period in absence of the Headmaster/Headmistress and for the same such post has been created under the statute. If it is created by the statute then it definitely has some meaning and purpose. It is a separate identity not only by nomenclature but also by creating a statutory post with a different head under ROPA (Revision of Pay and Allowances). It is also desirable for the sake of administrative exigencies that in absence of Headmaster/Headmistress he/she will run the administration. This has been made for the specific purpose as above. Otherwise the Court would have been flooded with the litigation‟s for filling of the post of Teacher‐in‐Charge in absence of the Headmaster/Headmistress. This is a discouragable thing and definitely for such reason a post has been created in the form of hierarchy under the statute by 8 the name of Assistant Headmaster/Assistant Headmistress in between Headmaster/Headmistress and Assistant Teacher. It is true that the Managing Committee has a right to appoint a Teacher‐in‐ Charge for a temporary period till such post is filled up by the regular Headmaster/Headmistress provided that there is no such Assistant Headmaster/Assistant Headmistress for the purpose of officiation till the post of regularly filled up. As and when Assistant Headmaster/Assistant Headmistress is available in an Institution there is no scope of the Managing Committee to take a resolution contrary to the interest of the administration which ultimately affects imparting of education to the students unless very exceptional circumstances arise for which the Assistant Headmaster/Assistant Headmistress is also prevented from officiating as Headmaster/Headmistress.” 14.2 In the Teacher in Charge, Dhuliyan High Madrasah (H.S.) (supra) the Hon’ble Division Bench in appeal arising from Baijid Hossain (supra) observed that it is settled that in absence of a regular Head Master/Head Mistress in an institution the approved Assistant Headmaster/Headmistress should be allowed to function as TIC. 15. Further, vide Memo No.1277-GA dated 4th July, 2018, the School Education Department directed as follows: “Consequent upon some reported incidents, his/her attention is invited to the existing amended rules in respect of management of recognised non-government aided schools and management of sponsored Institutions(Secondary) vide notification no. 215-SE(S) and 216-SE(S) both Hated 08.03.18, wherein it has been clearly stated that Asstt. Headmaster or Asst Headmistress will officiate in the post of Headmaster or Headmistress during temporary vacancy of H.M. Therefore, if Assistant Headmaster/Assistant Headmistress is available, no other teacher could be appointed as TIC at any school, the above mentioned rules should be enforced strictly. Moreover, he/she is hereby directed to submit a report regarding the schools where TIC has been functioning inspite of availability of Asstt. Headmaster or Asstt. Headmistress.” 9 16. Moreover, the Annual Academic Calendar, 2026 issued vide notification under Memo No.76/Aca/25 dated 24th December, 2025 at Clause (9) also indicates as follows: “During temporary vacancy of the Head of the Madrasah (Head Master/Head Mistress/ Superintendent), the Assistant Head Master/Assistant Head Mistress/Assistant Superintendent shall officiate the post of Head of the Madrasah, no other Teacher is required to be appointed as Teacher in Charge (TIC) in the said Madrasah. In case of non availability of Assistant Head Master/Assistant Head Mistress/ Assistant Superintendent, TIC will officiate the post of Head of Madrasah.” 17. Bearing in mind the aforesaid observation in the above decisions and the Government notification as above, it is now settled that approved Assistant Headmaster/Headmistress in absence of a regular Head Master/Head Mistress in an institution has a legally enforceable right to be appointed as a TIC and should be allowed to function as TIC in the said Madrasah. Therefore, the appointment of the Assistant Teacher, Md. Zahidul Islam by the Managing Committee as the TIC is de hors the provision of rules. 18. Accordingly, the resolution dated 20th June, 2026 appointing Md. Zahidul Islam cannot be sustained. At the same time, in the above conspectus, the removal of Md. Asif Rahman, who is the Assistant Headmaster of the said Madrasah, from discharging the function of TIC by the Managing Committee is beyond the provisions of existing rules and, therefore, is arbitrary 10 and not sustainable in law. It is also relevant to note that the resolution dated 20th June, 2026 has been taken without service of notice upon Md. Asif Rahman. 19. Hence the resolution adopted by the Managing Committee dated 20th June, 2026 is set aside. 20. In light of the above, following directions are issued: (i) The petitioner in WP-I, Md. Asif Rahman be reinstated as TIC of the said Madrasah forthwith. (ii) The petitioner no.1 Md. Zahidul Islam, Assistant Teacher of the said Madrasah and petitioner no.2 Sahidul Sk, the Secretary of the Managing Committee in WP-II as well as the Managing Committee are directed to hand over the documents which were taken over from the almirah of the Assistant Headmaster and are lying in their custody to Md. Asif Rahman, within a period of three weeks from date. 21. With the aforesaid direction, both the writ petitions being WPA 14606 of 2026 and WPA 15052 of 2026 stand disposed of. 22. However, it is left open to Md. Zahidul Islam (respondent no.10 in WP-I and petitioner no.1 in WP- II) to pursue his grievance before the appropriate authority in accordance with law. 23. Since no affidavits have been called for, the allegation made in the writ petition is deemed to be not admitted. 11 24. Interim order, if any, stands vacated. 25. All connected applications, if any, stand disposed of. 26. There shall be no order as to costs. 27. All concerned parties shall act in terms of the copy of the order duly downloaded from the official website of this Court. 28. Urgent Photostat certified copy of the order, if applied for, be given to the parties on compliance of all necessary legal formalities. (Bivas Pattanayak, J.)