S/L 23 14.09.2026 Court No.24 SD IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA CONSTITUTIONAL WRIT JURISDICTION WPA 9819 of 2026 Alok Chaki Vs. The State of West Bengal & Ors. Mr. Sakti Pada Jana Mr. Subhajyoti Das … for the Petitioner. Mr. Lokenath Chatterjee, Jr. SC Ms. Sneha Chatterjee … for the State. Ms. Soma Kar Ghosh Ms. Suparna Paul Ms. Shilpi Ghosh … for the Respondent No.6. 1. Affidavit of service filed in Court today be kept with the records. 2. The petitioner is aggrieved by the direction passed by the District Inspector of Schools (SE), Kolkata directing him to produce requisite papers in support of his pay for updating his service book. 3. It appears that the petitioner initially joined Alambazar Arya Vidyalaya High School on December 12, 2003 and he was paid in accordance with the Honours scale of pay. Thereafter, the petitioner appeared in a separate recruitment process and he got selected for appointment in Adarsha Madhyamik Vidyalaya as Assistant Teacher under the Post Graduate scale of pay. Thereafter, he got promoted in the post of Headmaster in the year 2019 in Garden Reach K.C. Mills High (H.S.) School and transferred as Headmaster in Sukchar Kedar Nath Podder High School. 2 4. Allegation of the petitioner is that the District Inspector of Schools did not take into consideration his initial pay when he joined service in Alambazar Arya Vidyalaya High School and erroneously came to a conclusion that the pay of the petitioner in Adarsha Madhyamik Vidyalaya ought to be Rs.6,000/- in place and instead of Rs.6,225/-. 5. Prayer has been made to direct the respondent authorities to update his service book as the entries made in his service book from his very first date of joining were duly countersigned by the DI of Schools. 6. Learned advocate representing the State respondents relies on the instruction forwarded by the District Inspector of Schools (SE), Kolkata wherefrom it appears that an issue with regard to his pay fixation has been raised by the authority. The petitioner has been found to have drawn excess money than his entitlement for which he has been directed to refund the overdrawn amount. 7. Learned advocate representing the Garden Reach K.C. Mills High (H.S.) School produces a photocopy of the service book of the petitioner wherein against the entry made on November 1, 2007, the pay of the petitioner which was initially recorded as Rs.6,000/- was penned through and Rs.6,225/- was recorded. The date which was mentioned as October 31, 2008 was penned through and mentioned as November 30, 2007. 3 8. It has been submitted that there is no seal, signature or date mentioned against such alleged correction that has been made in the service book of the petitioner. 9. Upon hearing the submission made on behalf of all the parties and on perusal of the documents placed before this Court, it appears that the petitioner’s pay has been disputed by the authority. He is in service from 2003. The petitioner thereafter appeared in a fresh selection process in the year 2007 and got selected. The pay of the petitioner ought to be protected in accordance with the relevant rules/notifications/memo. 10. As the DI has raised objection with the pay of the petitioner, it may not be proper to relegate the matter to the same authority for adjudication. 11. Under such circumstances, the Court thinks it fit to direct the Commissioner of School Education, West Bengal or his authorized representative to adjudicate the issue of pay fixation of the petitioner upon providing an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner, the concerned DI of Schools, the representatives of the respective schools and thereafter take a decision in the matter. 12. All the aforesaid authorities are directed to cooperate with the Commissioner of School Education for proper adjudication of the pay of the petitioner. 4 13. A decision shall be taken in the matter at the earliest, but positively within a period of twelve weeks from the date of communication of this order. 14. Till a decision is taken in the matter in terms of the direction passed hereinabove, no coercive steps for obtaining refund of the alleged overdrawal amount shall be taken against the petitioner. All parties shall take further consequential steps relying on the adjudication made by the Commissioner of School Education or his authorized representative. 15. The writ petition stands disposed of. 16. Parties to act on the basis of the server copy of this order duly downloaded from the official website of this Court. 17. Certified server copy of this order, if applied for, be supplied to the parties upon compliance of all requisite formalities. (Amrita Sinha, J.)