W.P.A. 1213 of 2026, A. Roy,J. Form J(2) Sl. No. 34 AB High Court at Calcutta In the Circuit Bench at Jalpaiguri Constitutional Writ Jurisdiction Appellate Side Present: The Hon’ble Justice Aniruddha Roy W.P.A. 1213 of 2026 Prabhat Ranjan Vs. The State of West Bengal & Ors. For the petitioner : Mr. Debajit Kundu For the State : Mr. Kunaljit Bhattacharjee, Ld. AGP Mr. Subhankar Dutta Heard on : August 12, 2026 Judgment on : : August 12, 2026 [ IN COURT ] Aniruddha Roy,J. 1. Affidavit of service filed in Court today is taken on record. 2. The petitioner claims to be an Assistant Teacher of a school. The petitioner contends that, he had applied for prior permission through the Managing Committee of the school before the Jurisdictional District Inspector of Schools but the District Inspector of Schools did not grant the prior permission for completing the Master degree of the petitioner, though the Managing Committee of the school granted permission. 3. Referring to a communication dated May 23, 2017, annexure P-5 at page 31 to the writ petition Mr. Debajit Kundu, learned advocate W.P.A. 1213 of 2026, A. Roy,J. 2 appearing for the petitioner submits that, the school had submitted a prayer before the D.I. on May 24, 2017 but the D.I. failed to grant prior permission for completing Master degree by the petitioner. 4. After considering the submissions made on behalf of the parties and on perusal of the materials on record it appears to this Court that, the communication of the school dated May 23, 2017, annexure P-5 at page 31 to the writ petition shows that the school had applied for post facto permission from the D.I. The law is well settled that, after Control of Expenditure Act came into effect, prior permission from the D.I. is mandatory. Therefore, post facto permission even though granted could not be considered as a valid prior permissions and the question of post facto permission would not arise even. 5. In view of the foregoing reasons and discussions, this Court finds that there is no merit in this writ petition and the claim of the petitioner is unjustified and not a valid claim in the eye of law. 6. Accordingly, this writ petition being W.P.A. 1213 of 2026 stands dismissed, without any order as to costs. 7. Photostat certified copy of this order, if applied for, be furnished expeditiously. (Aniruddha Roy, J.)