Court No. 10 (1629) 21.07.2026 (JPD 13) (S. Banerjee) Calcutta High Court In the Circuit Bench at Jalpaiguri Appellate Side WPA 1168 of 2026 Dinesh Sinha Vs. The State of West Bengal & Ors. Mr. Pradip Chatterjee Mr. Uday Sankar Sarkar Mr. Avimannu Das … for the petitioner Mr. Arijit Ghosh Mr. Subhankar Dutta … for State The petitioner claims to have joined the institution as a Headmaster on May 10, 2006. The said institution was upgraded as a Higher Secondary school by virtue of office memo dated October 8, 2013. Petitioner submitted application before the concerned respondent authority praying for grant of additional increment at the rate of 3%. The prayer of the petitioner for additional increment at the rate of 3% has been rejected by the District Inspector of Schools (SE), Jalpaiguri by a memo dated November 7, 2025. Being aggrieved, the petitioner has approached this Court. 2 Learned advocate appearing for the petitioner submits that the prayer of the petitioner for grant of additional increment at the rate of 3% was rejected by applying the provisions contained in memo no. 292- SL/55-294/12 dated March 22, 2017 issued by the Secretary to the Government of West Bengal. He submits that the said memo has already been quashed by a coordinate Bench by an order dated May 7, 2024 passed in WPA 23867 of 2017 in the case of Kanchiram Sarkar & Ors. –Vs.- State of West Bengal & Ors. The report of the District Inspector of Schools (SE) dated July 17, 2026 filed by the learned advocate appearing for the State is taken on record. In the said report it has been stated that no additional increment can be allowed in favour of the petitioner in view of the office memo dated March 22, 2017 since the school was upgraded as a Higher Secondary school after February 27, 2009. The issue as to whether the Headmasters serving in the institutions which have been upgraded as a Higher Secondary school on or after February 27, 3 2009 are entitled to additional increment, fell for consideration before the coordinate Bench in Kanchiram Sarkar & Ors. (supra). In paragraph 20 of the said decision the coordinate Bench was pleased to set aside the notification dated March 22, 2017. Record reveals that the prayer of the petitioner for grant of additional increment at the rate of 3% was rejected by the District Inspector of Schools (SE), Jalpaiguri by issuing a memo subsequent to the passing of the judgement in Kanchiram Sarkar & Ors. (supra). This Court holds that District Inspector of Schools (SE), Jalpaiguri could not have rejected the prayer of the petitioner by relying upon the memo dated March 22, 2017, which has already been set aside and quashed. In view thereof, the decision of the District Inspector of Schools (SE), Jalpaiguri communicated to the petitioner vide memo no. 2364 dated November 7, 2025 stands set aside and quashed. The Commissioner of School Education, Government of West Bengal, 4 being the respondent no. 3, is directed to consider the representation of the petitioner dated October 7, 2025 afresh and dispose of the same by passing a reasoned order in the light of the observations made hereinbefore and dispose of the same after affording an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner or his authorized representative and communicate the reasoned order to the petitioner as expeditiously as possible but positively within a period of four weeks from the receipt of a server copy of this order. It is, however, made clear that though the representation dated October 7, 2025 has been addressed to the Joint Secretary, School Education Department (Secondary Branch) but the same shall be considered by the Commissioner of School Education, Government of West Bengal without raising any technical plea. With the above observations and directions, this writ petition stands disposed of. (Hiranmay Bhattacharyya, J.)