27.07.2026 Court No.652 Item No.22 AP WPA 11993 of 2023 Suman Biswas Vs. The State of West Bengal & Ors. Mr. Sakti Pada Jana Mr. Subhajyoti Das … For the Petitioner. 1. The issue involved in the instant writ petition is with regard to the present petitioner is eligible for being approved in service in a D.A. getting school, in a vacant post within the sanctioned strength of the school, being an unapproved employee appointed by the school authority. 2. The writ petitioner has challenged an order of the District Inspector of Schools (SE) Kolkata dated August 1, 2022. 3. By dint of the said order the respondent authority as above has, inter alia, held that in view of setting aside of the notification No.2116 – GA dated November 3, 2011, by a subsequent Memo No.2341 – GA dated December 13, 2011, the existing unapproved staff in a D.A. getting school, would not be eligible for approval, as against a sanction vacant post arisen in the said school. 4. The fact remains that the writ petitioner was appointed in the school on September 1, 2018 and he was confirmed in service by the school authority with effect from April 1, 2019. Since thereafter the writ petitioner has 2 discharged duties as an unapproved clerk of the said school. A sanctioned post earlier occupied by Mr. Shila Nath Singh, stood vacant due to retirement of that person with effect from June 30, 2005. The writ petitioner, therefore, has sought for being approved as a permanent staff of the school, as against the said post, which stood vacant due to retirement of a permanent employee. 5. However, though the writ petitioner’s prayer to that effect was duly supported by the school authority by dint of resolution in its meeting, the same was never considered initially, by the respondent authority. In that view of the matter, this Court interfered in WPO 117 of 2021 vide order dated June 21, 2022, directing the District Inspector of Schools to consider the writ petitioner’s prayer as above. 6. The resultant order is that dated August 1, 2022, which has been challenged by the writ petitioner in the instant writ petition. 7. Mr. Jana, learned counsel for the writ petitioner has contended that the Government Order No.2341 – GA dated December 13, 2011, by virtue of which the earlier Government order No.2116 – GA dated November 3, 2011, was cancelled, has been subsequently set aside by this Court vide order dated March 31, 2014, in the case of Abhijit Sharma Vs. State of West Bengal & Ors. in WP 9640(W) of 2012. 3 8. Mr. Jana has further referred to the following two orders of this Court to submit that following the judgment of Abhijit Sharma (supra), this Court has earlier granted relief to the writ petitioner in the similar set of facts:- (i) Vide order dated November 6, 2024 in WPA 17984 of 2023 (Partha Saha Vs. The State of West Bengal & Ors.). (ii) Vide order dated April 11, 2025 in WPA 15064 of 2024 (Muneshwar Pal Vs. The State of West Bengal & Ors.). 9. He has further submitted that the Court having set aside the Government Order No.2341 – GA dated December 13, 2011, the earlier Government Order No. 2116 – GA dated November 3, 2011 stand revived and in vogue once again. He refers to the said Government order No.2116 – GA dated November 3, 2011, to submit that in terms thereof the school authority is entitled to appoint an existing staff against a permanent vacant post available within the staff pattern of the school. 10. In such circumstances, Mr. Jana, learned counsel for the writ petitioner has sought for appropriate relief in the instant writ petition. 11. In spite of service of the copy of the writ petition along with notice to the present dispensation of the State, none appears to defend the State respondents. Affidavit of service filed in Court is taken on record. 4 12. Hence, this matter is taken up for consideration and disposed of in absence of the State respondent. 13. Having heard Mr. Jana, learned counsel for the writ petitioner and having perused the documents on record, it appears that this Court has by dint of an order dated March 31, 2014 in Abhijit Sharma’ case (supra), has set aside the Government Order No.2341 – GA dated December 13, 2011. In such circumstances, there is no doubt about what has been submitted on behalf of the writ petitioner to be settled and sacrosanct, that the earlier Government Order No.2116 – GA dated November 3, 2011, has been consequently revived and stands in vogue. The relevant provision thereof may be quoted as hereinbelow:- “3) Whenever the vacancy arises the Managing Committee of concerned school will approach the concerned D.I/S(SE) for permission order along with a copy of resolution involving the placement of concerned staff and copies of all certificates of incumbent concerned. If there is more than one staff preference should be given to the senior most.” 14. According to the same, the existing unapproved staff of the D.A. getting schools is eligible for being appointed as against a sanctioned vacant post therein, subject to fulfillment of other necessary conditions as regards eligibility etcetra. 15. This Court has also considered the earlier orders passed in view of the decision of this Court in Abhijit Sharma (supra), as well as the Government Notification as mentioned above. There is no reason to deprecate and 5 divert from the earlier decision by this Court, since similar factual background appears to be there in the present writ petition too. 16. Accordingly, this writ petition is allowed with the following directions:- (i) The impugned order dated August 1, 2022 is set aside; (ii) The writ petitioner will be eligible for being approved in the post of clerk in the respondent school; (iii) The respondent District Inspector of Schools (SE) Kolkata, is directed to immediately grant approval of the writ petitioner, as prayed for by him, maximum within a period of four weeks from the date of communication of a copy of this order. (iv) Consequently, fixation of pay shall be made by the respondent District Inspector of Schools (SE) Kolkata, as regards the writ petitioner immediately after issuance of approval order in terms of direction as above. 17. With the aforesaid direction the writ petition is allowed and disposed of. 18. There shall be no order as to costs. 6 19. Urgent certified copy of this order, if applied for, be supplied to the parties upon compliance with all requisite formalities. (Rai Chattopadhyay, J.)