31.08.2026 Sl. No.11 Ct. No.14 gd IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA CONSTITUTIONAL WRIT JURISDICTION APPELLATE SIDE WPA/9299/2026 Manoranjan Santra VS The State of West Bengal and Ors. Mr. Tulsidas Maiti Ms. Namita Basu …for the Petitioner. Mr. Bikash Chandra Das Ms. Ritu Das …for the State. 1. Affidavit of service filed by the petitioner is taken on record. 2. By the present writ petition the petitioner seeks direction upon the respondent authorities to allow the petitioner to join his original post as an Assistant Teacher of Gochhati Battala Primary School under Sonakhali Circle, District-Paschim Medinipur upon withdrawal of the order of suspension issued by respondent no.4, Chairman District Primary School Council, Paschim Medinipur vide Memo No.3530/8/G.S dated 2nd December, 2025. 3. The petitioner contends that on being appointed on 6th February, 2002 the petitioner joined as an Assistant Teacher of Ratneswarbati Deshapran Primary School under Ghatal Circle, District-Paschim Medinipur on 13th February, 2002. Subsequent thereto, the petitioner was transferred to Gochhati Battala Primary School under Sonakhali Circle, District-Paschim Medinipur on 14th June, 2007. On 23rd August, 2025, the wife of the younger brother of the petitioner lodged a complaint before the local police station with the allegation against the petitioner of causing rape upon her. The said complaint was registered against the petitioner being Daspur Police Station Case No.426 of 2025 dated 23rd August, 2025 under Sections 64(2)(1)/64(2)(m)/351(3) of Bharatiya Naya Sanhita (in short ‘BNS’).The petitioner was arrested on 23rd August, 2025 in connection with the aforesaid criminal case. Subsequent thereto the petitioner was granted bail on 29th August, 2025 by the Additional Sessions Judge, Ghatal. Since the petitioner was detained in custody beyond 48 hours, hence as per Rule 7(2) of West Bengal Primary Education (conduct of Service of Teachers of Primary School) Rules, 2001 (hereinafter referred to as the ‘Rules of 2001’), the petitioner was put under suspension on 2nd December, 2025 till acquittal from the charges against him. Being aggrieved by and dissatisfied with the impugned memo of respondent no.4, petitioner has preferred the present writ petition. 4. Mr. Tulsidas Maiti, learned advocate appearing for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in this case by the wife of his younger brother only to settle the land disputes. The allegations made in the criminal case have no legs to stand in the eye of law. The petitioner on 20th January, 2026 made a representation before the concerned authority for rejoining his post. However, the same is still pending 2 consideration. He seeks that the matter may be relegated to the authority concerned for taking a decision on the representation of the petitioner. 5. On the contrary, Mr. Bikash Chandra Das, learned advocate for the State submits that the petitioner is the Teacher of a school and allegation against the petitioner is of commission of rape upon his sister-in-law, which is a serious offence. Hence, the prayer for withdrawal of suspension in the facts and circumstances of this case should be dismissed in limine. 6. Upon hearing the learned advocates for respective parties, the only issue which falls for consideration is whether the impugned order of suspension issued by respondent no.4, is sustainable or not. 7. Admittedly, the petitioner was put under suspension upon his detention in connection with a criminal case initiated under Sections under Sections 64(2)(1)/64(2) (m)/351(3) of BNS. The said criminal case is pending before the learned trial court. Be that as it may, one cannot be oblivious to the fact that the petitioner being the Teacher of an educational institution is alleged to have been involved in the offence of rape upon his sister-in-law. An educational institution is an establishment that provides education to the learners and is designed to impart knowledge, skills, values and cultural norms to individuals in a structured manner. The petitioner being the Teacher has a moral and ethical duty to carry forward such purpose of educational institution. There cannot be any manner of doubt that 3 the allegations of commission of rape is a grievous one and therefore should not viewed lightly. In the opinion of this court allowing the petitioner, allegedly involved in such offence, to resume his duties in the said school upon withdrawal of the suspension order would have a repulsive impact on the environment of the said school where education is offered and imparted to the children of tender age. In light of the above discussion, the writ petition falls short of merit. 8. Accordingly, the writ petition being WPA 9299 of 2026 stands dismissed. 9. Since no affidavits have been called for, the allegation made in the writ petition is deemed to be not admitted. 10. Interim order, if any, stands vacated. 11. All connected applications, if any, stand disposed of. 12. There shall be no order as to costs. 13. All concerned parties shall act in terms of the copy of the order duly downloaded from the official website of this Court. 14. 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.) 4