SANCHITA BANERJEE v. STATE OF WEST BENGAL AND ORS.
WPA/12906/2026 · 2026-09-29
Amrita Sinha
Transfer Petitionbody2026
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2026 DAILYLAW 44782 (CAL) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2026 DAILYLAW 44782 (CAL) · dailylaw.ai ]
Judgment text
Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
29th Sept., 2026
Item no.D/L 32 Court No. 24
Pradip, A.R.(Ct.) In the High Court at Calcutta Constitutional Writ Jurisdiction Appellate Side
Case No.
WPA 12906 of 2026
In the matter of: Sanchita Banerjee …. Petitioner VS. The State of West Bengal & Ors. ….Respondents For the Petitioner: Mr. Sakti Pada Jana Mr. Subhajyoti Das ….Advocates For the State: Mr. Indrajit Roy Ms. Mary Datta ….Advocates
1. Affidavit of service filed in Court today is taken on record. 2. The petitioner is aggrieved by rejection of his prayer for grant of higher scale of pay on obtaining post graduate degree by the District Inspector of Schools (SE), North 24-Parganas vide impugned communicating memo being no.41/1(3) LAW dated 24th March,
2026. 3. Prayer for higher scale of pay has been rejected solely relying on GO No.593-SE(B) dated November 27, 2007. 4. A larger Bench of this Court in the matter of Utpal Kanti Karan & Ors. –vs- State of West Bengal & Ors. reported in (2024) SCC OnLine Cal 1274 took note of the fact that GO No.593-SE(B) dated November 27, 2007 has not been published in the Gazette and hence does not have any statutory force. 5. It appears from records that the petitioner joined service in 2008. She applied for admission in the Master Degree Course in 2012. The managing committee of the school adopted a resolution to grant prior
Page 2
permission to the petitioner for pursuing the course. Relying upon such prior permission, the petitioner obtained admission and completed Master Degree Course in 2016. Certificate was issued in her favour in July 2017. The school requested the DI of Schools to accord higher scale of pay to the petitioner in October, 2017. 6. Whether non-forwarding of the resolution of the managing committee according prior permission to the petitioner to enhance her educational qualification will disentitle the teacher to receive higher scale of pay was considered by the Court in WPA No.29958 of 2016 in the matter of Narayan Chandra Barai v. The State of West Bengal & Ors. and order was passed on March 19, 2024 holding that the obligation of a teacher comes to an end the moment the teacher applies before the managing committee of the school for obtaining prior permission for enhancement of the educational qualification.
Thereafter, it is the obligation of the managing committee to forward such resolution to the concerned DI of Schools for obtaining prior permission. 7. The Court in WPA No.21695 of 2025 (Sanjay Mondal v. State of West Bengal & Ors. passed order on November 14, 2025 in similar set of facts directing the concerned DI of Schools to take steps for grant of higher scale of pay. 8. It appears that the school where the petitioner was serving adopted the resolution to permit the petitioner to enhance her educational qualification. It was the duty and responsibility of the school to forward the resolution to the DI of Schools in proper time. 9. It does not appear that there was any default on the part of the petitioner in obtaining the prior permission from the school authority for enhancement of her educational qualification. The school ought to have intimated the DI of Schools as regards the resolution adopted
Page 3
by the school to permit the petitioner to enhance her educational qualification. 10. In view of the direction passed in the matter of Narayan Chandra Barai (supra) rejection of the petitioner’s claim for higher scale of pay cannot be sustained. 11. The DI of Schools is directed to take necessary steps for grant of higher scale of pay to the petitioner in accordance with the relevant rules at the earliest but positively within a period of eight weeks from the date of communication of this order. 12. All consequential benefits shall be released in favour of the petitioner without any further delay. 13. The impugned order of rejection stands set aside. 14. The writ petition stands disposed of. 15. Parties to act on the basis of the server copy of this order duly downloaded from the official website of this Court. 16. Certified server copy of this order, if applied for, be supplied to the parties upon compliance of all requisite formalities. (Amrita Sinha, J.)