AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
MD. SHABBAR RASHIDI, J.:-
The instant writ application has been filed by the writ petitioner challenging an order passed by the District Inspector of Schools (SE), Purba Bardhaman dated February 04, 2020.
By the impugned order, the District Inspector of Schools (SE), Purba Bardhaman refused the prayer of the petitioner for appointment on compassionate ground. The District Inspector of Schools (SE), Purba Bardhaman decided the application for appointment of the petitioner on compassionate ground by the impugned order dated February 4, 2020 in the following manner:-
“It is found that Family Income, as determined from Gross Family Pension, is not less than initial gross salary of Gr.-“D” Employee at the material point of time (i.e. on the date of death of LATE ANIL KUMAR GHOSH). So the family is not in extreme financial hardship as per explanation described in Para-1 of Schedule V, Rule 20 & 21 of School Education Department Notification No.697-ES/S/1A-18/08 dated 09/07/2009. So his prayer for Appointment under Compassionate Ground cannot be considered from this end. This is for your information.”
It is further submitted by the learned advocate for the petitioner that the District Inspector of Schools (SE), Purba Bardhaman has gone wrong in complying the directions contained in Para-1 of Schedule V, Rule 20 & 21 of School Education Department Notification No.697-ES/S/1S-18/08 dated 09/07/2009.
It is further submitted by learned advocate for the petitioner that similar matter came up before this Hon’ble Court in MAT 1664 of 2023 (Bitasoke Mahata vs. The State of West Bengal & Ors.). He further submits that based on ratio laid down in MAT 1664 of 2023, another writ application being WPA 9213 of 2024 (Suchismita Khatua vs. The State of West Bengal & Ors.) was decided directing the District Inspector of Schools (SE), Purba Bardhaman to reconsider the matter for appointment on compassionate ground in terms of the order passed on January 17, 2024 in MAT 1664 of 2023.
Learned advocate for the petitioner further submits that the District Inspector of Schools (SE), Purba Bardhaman vide the impugned memo has erroneously refused the prayer of the petitioner for appointment on compassionate ground by taking wrong calculation of the income of the family of the petitioner. The District Inspector of Schools (SE), Purba Bardhaman in issuing the impugned memo has committed the similar error and has wrongly taken into consideration the components of dearness allowance, medical allowance as well as house rent allowance for the purpose of calculating the family income of the petitioner. Learned advocate for the petitioner submits that the order passed in MAT 1664 of 2023 and WPA 9213 of 2024, the District Inspector of Schools (SE), Purba Bardhaman be directed to re-calculate the family income of the petitioner for the purpose of consideration of his claim for appointment on compassionate ground.
On the other hand, learned advocate for the State submits that conducting the amounts calculated towards dearness allowance, medical allowance and house rent allowance, the family income of the petitioner is more than the gross salary of Group-‘D’ Employee at the relevant point of time. As such, learned advocate for the State prays for dismissal of the instant writ application.
The petitioner is Madhyamik Pass. He passed Madhyamik Examination in the year 2011 and Higher Secondary in the year 2013. He also obtained Bachelor Degree in 2016 followed by B.Ed degree.
Father of the petitioner Late Anil Kumar Ghosh was Assistant Teacher of Bengali posted at Gotan Subodh Memorial High School, Purba Bardhaman. Father of the petitioner died in harness at the age of 56 years on November 15, 2017. Upon the death of his father, the petitioner earlier applied for appointment on the basis of died-in-harness category.
Upon receipt of the application filed by the petitioner, the Managing Committee of the School considered his prayer and by the resolution of the Committee dated August 9, 2018, a proposal was signed by the Headmaster of the School for appointment of Assistant Teacher in the category of ‘died-in-harness’.
Upon receipt of such proposal, respondent no.3, District Inspector of Schools (SE), Purba Bardhaman, considered the prayer of the petitioner and rejected the same in the category of ‘died-in-harness’ by the impugned memo dated February 4, 2020. It was pointed out in such memo that gross family pension of the petitioner was not less than the initial gross salary of a Group-‘D’ employee at the material point of time. In such circumstances, it was held that the family was not in extreme financial hardship as explained in Para-1 of Schedule V appended to Rules 20 & 21 of School Education Department Notification No.697-ES/S/1S-18/08 dated 09/07/2009.
Impugned memo goes to show that for calculation of the gross family pension, EFP- Rs.16265/-, DA- Rs.13825/-, Interim Relief- Rs.1301/-, Medical Allowance-Rs.300/-, Gross Pension was calculated to Rs.31,694/- 60% of which amounted to Rs.22348/-. The said memo also calculated the gross initial salary of a Group-D Staff at Rs.13990/-. On such score, the District Inspector of Schools (SE), Purba Bardhaman, by the impugned memo, came to a conclusion that the family pension of the petitioner was not less than the gross initial salary of a Group-D staff as required in the Para-1 of Schedule V, Rule 20 & 21 of School Education Department Notification No.697-ES/S/1S-18/08 dated 09/07/2009.
In the Bitasoke Mahata (supra) it was held by the High Court that
“3.On a plain reading of the said Rule, it appears that for computation of income of the family Provident Fund, Gratuity and 40% of the Family Pension of the first seven year shall be excluded. We are not referring to other portion of the said Rule as they are not relevant for the present purpose. The question arises whether “dearness allowance and medical allowance can be treated as part of income of such family”. The Rule has clearly stated that if a family member has an income earned from “any other source” other than provident fund, gratuity and 40% of the family pension, that could be taken into consideration in addition to 60% of the family pension earned by the members of the deceased family in determining the financial hardship. This Rule has not been amended. Unlike the Government of West Bengal Labour Department Circular No. 251-Emp dated 3rd December, 2013, the total family pension per month does not include the basic pension, dearness allowance and medical allowance. The said scheme is beneficial in nature and the Court should not ordinarily read into the Rules something which was never intended or expressly provided. The rule has to be read plainly without importing any word and in case of any ambiguity an interpretation favouring the applicant should be accepted keeping in mind the object of the said Rule.
4.On such consideration, we set aside the order passed by the District Inspector of Schools (S.E.), Bankura dated 14th November, 2009 and consequently the order impugned in the appeal dated 26th July, 2023.
5.We direct the District Inspector of Schools (S.E.), Bankura to consider the case of the petitioner for compassionate appointment after taking into consideration all other relevant facts within a period of four weeks from the date of communication of this order by either of the parties after giving an opportunity of hearing to the appellant.
6.In the event the appellant is found to be eligible, immediate steps should be taken for his appointment to a post commensurate with his qualification.”
Similarly in Suchismita Khatua (supra), coordinate Bench of this Court held as follows:-
“10.As it appears that the Hon’ble Division Bench of this Court has held that dearness allowance and medical allowance cannot be included for ascertaining family income of the family for the purpose of providing compassionate appointment, accordingly, the calculation of family income of the petitioner by including the dearness allowance, house rent allowance and medical allowance and arriving at the impugned conclusion that the income of the family is more than the salary of a Group-D staff of the State Government does not appear to be proper.
11.The impugned order of the District Inspector of Schools (Secondary Education), Purba Medinipur dated 24th June, 2020, accordingly, stands set aside.
12.The District Inspector of Schools (Secondary Education), Purba Medinipur is directed to re-calculate the family income of the petitioner strictly in accordance with law and in line with the order passed in the matter of Bitasoke Mahata (supra).
13.Steps shall be taken at the earliest but positively within a period of six weeks from the date of communication of this order.
14.A final order shall be passed and communicated to the petitioner immediately thereafter.”
Apparently, in the present writ petition, the District Inspector of Schools (S.E) while considering the prayer of the petitioner for appointment on compassionate ground calculated the family pension of the family of the petitioner taking into consideration the dearness allowance and medical allowance which is not permissible in terms of the notification of Education Department
Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case, and applying the ratio laid down in Bitasoke Mahata (supra) the impugned memo dated February 4, 2020 is set aside.
The District Inspector of Schools (SE), Purba Bardhaman is directed to re-calculate the family income of the petitioner strictly in accordance with law and relevant notification of the Education Department as well as in line with the order passed in the matter of Bitasoke Mahata (supra).
Steps shall be taken at the earliest positively within a period of six weeks from the date of communication of this order.
Upon re-calculation, a fresh order shall be passed by the District Inspector of Schools (SE), Purba Bardhaman in terms of the directions made in this order and such decision will be communicated to the petitioner immediately after taking such decision.
Upon such re-calculation, if the petitioner is found entitled for appointment on compassionate ground, immediate steps in this regard shall be taken by the State respondents particularly respondent No.3 positively within a period of six weeks of such decision.
With the aforesaid directions/observations, W.P.A. 10541 of 2020 stands disposed of.
Urgent Photostat certified copy of this judgment, if applied for, be supplied expeditiously after complying with all necessary legal formalities.