27.07.2026 Court No.652 Item No.24 AP WPA 15626 of 2023 Golak Behari Bera Vs. The State of West Bengal & Ors. Mr. Sakti Pada Jana Mr. Subhajyoti Das … For the Petitioner. 1. The writ petitioner, who is now retired, claims to have been declared as an Organiser Teacher of the school, by dint of a judgment and decree of Civil Court dated May 14, 2015 in Title Suit No.102 of 2001 by the Civil Judge (Junior Division) at Haldia. He further says that the judgment of the Civil Judge (Junior Division) at Haldia as above has been affirmed by the Appellate Court in Title Appeal No.08 of 2016 vide order dated December 7, 2022. 2. These are the development subsequent to rejection of the writ petitioner’s prayer for approval by the respondent District Inspector of Schools (S.E.), Tamluk vide order dated June 14, 2001. The said order dated June 14, 2001 is under challenge in the instant writ petition. The respondent authority has particularly relied on a declaration made by the school authority on affidavit before the District Level Inspection Team, at the time of inspection for the purpose of recognition of the school, declaring that the school does not have any Organiser Teacher. 2 3. Mr. Jana, learned counsel for the writ petitioner has submitted further, alongside the factual background of the case as above, that this Court has earlier deprecated the practice of furnishing any undertaking or affidavit before the DLIT, by the school authority. In this regard he has referred to an order of the Court dated April 19, 2000 in WP 4389(W) of 2000. 4. It is submitted further that the petitioner has already been superannuated from service with effect from November 30, 2018. Therefore now the petitioner’s prayer is restricted to grant of notional benefit of approval of service, so that he may enjoy pension at his ripen age. 5. It appears that in spite of service having been effected upon the State authorities, the same is not represented at the time of hearing of the matter. The affidavit of service is taken on record. Due to absence of the respondent authorities, the matter is taken up for final adjudication without the State respondents being present. 6. In view of development of events subsequent to the order of the respondent District Inspector of Schools (S.E.), Tamluk vide order dated June 14, 2001, thereby rejecting the writ petitioner’s prayer for grant of approval, pursuant to the judgments of the Civil Court and the Appellate Court as mentioned above, it is found necessary that the said respondent authority revisits the grievance of the writ 3 petitioner again, in due consideration of the declarations made by the Civil Courts in the said judgments. 7. Accordingly, let this writ petition be disposed of directing the writ petitioner to immediately submit a comprehensive representation before the respondent No.3/ District Inspector of Schools (S.E.), Purba Medinipur. Let the respondent No.3/ District Inspector of Schools (S.E.), Purba Medinipur consider the same in the light of the judgments of the Civil Court and the Appellate Court, passed in favour of the writ petitioner as mentioned above and also other documents as it may find relevant for appropriate disposal of the writ petitioner’s prayer for approval. 8. The respondent No.3/ District Inspector of Schools (S.E.), Purba Medinipur shall conclude the entire exercise as above within a period of four weeks from the date of filing of a comprehensive representation along with a copy of this order by the writ petitioner before its good office. 9. It is needless to mention that in case the respondent No.3/District Inspector of Schools (S.E.), Purba Medinipur decides in view of the judgments of the Civil Court and the Appellate Court as above, in favour of the present writ petitioner, he shall take immediate steps for grant of appropriate benefit to the writ petitioner, within two weeks from the date of communication of a copy of this order. 4 10. Let it also be mentioned that the order of the respondent No.3/District Inspector of Schools (S.E.), Purba Medinipur should communicated to the writ petitioner forthwith. 11. There shall be no order as to costs. 12. Urgent certified copy of this order, if applied for, be supplied to the parties upon compliance with all requisite formalities. (Rai Chattopadhyay, J.)