Raj Ganguly vs State Of West Bengal & Ors

Shampa Sarkar, J

The affidavit-in-opposition and the affidavit-in-reply, filed in Court today, are taken on record.

This writ petition has been filed by the husband of a deceased headmistress of Boinchee Binapani Balika Vidyalaya.

Mr. Jha, learned advocate appearing for the petitioner, submits that pursuant to a direction of this Court dated January 20, 2016, passed in W.P. 13568 (W) of 2015, the Commissioner of School Education, West Bengal passed an order dated January 13, 2017. The said order is impunged in this writ petition. For convenience, the order is quoted below:

'1. Irrespective of the merit of the allegations, in existing law, as the Commissioner of School Education has no authority to allow any amount of money to any person as compensation, so the prayer of the petitioner for compensation of Rs. One Crore cannot be allowed and hence the prayer is regretted.

Irrespective of the merit of the allegations, in existing law, the Commissioner of School Education has no authority to start departmental proceedings and criminal investigation against the District Magistrate, Hooghly, the Block Development Officer, Pandua, the President, Vice President & Secretary of the then Managing Committee and a people of a locality. On the other hand the allegations made by the petitioner could not be established. So the prayer of the petitioner to start departmental proceedings and criminal investigation against the alleged authorities or persons cannot be allowed and hence the said prayer is regretted.

The Block Development Officer, Pandua is requested to provide information to the present Teacher-in-charge of the school, which has already been sought for, so that necessary certificate of "Liability" or "No Liability" may be issued by the school authority in order to release pensionery benefits and Provident Fund money of deceased Smt. Mondal. The Block Development Officer, Pandua will supply said information within one month from the date of receipt of this order and if the BDO fails to do so, then the Teacher-in-Charge will issue necessary certificate of "Liability" or "No Liability" as if the BDO has nothing to claim.

The aforesaid decisions will not preclude any authority to proceed with the complaint against Smt. Mondal, if there by any, in accordance with law.

All concerned be informed accordingly.'

It appears that the petitioner's claim for monetary compensation as damages for the mental torture caused to the petitioner's wife by the respondents, who have all been impleaded in this writ petition, was turned down on the ground that the Commissioner of School Education did not have any authority to allow any monetary compensation.

With regard to the other allegations against the District Magistrate, Hooghly, the Block Development Officer, Pandua, and the officer bearers of the managing committee as also some local persons, the Commissioner came to a finding that the Commissioner of School Education was not the disciplinary authority of these persons and no departmental action could be taken against them by the Commissioner of School Education.

With regard to the prayers for issuance of No Liability Certificate and the pensionary benefits, those have been addressed and, admittedly, the petitioner has received the death benefits of his deceased wife.

Ms. Bhattacharya, learned advocate appearing for the State respondents, submits that there are ample documents which would show that the wife of the petitioner expired due to a long term disease and the allegation against the authorities of the Government as regards the cause of death of the petitioner's wife was not correct.

Ms. Bhattacharya also submitted that the writ petition has not been properly filed. According to her, if the petitioner had any grievance against the actions of any of the authorities, acting in their individual capacity, then they should have been individually impleaded in the proceedings. She further submitted that if the petitioner's wife at the relevant point of time was aggrieved by any act of the respondents, acting in their private capacity which were cognizable offences, she was always at liberty to file a complaint before the investigation agencies. Her instructions are taken on record.

It is submitted by Mr. Mukherjee, learned advocate appearing for the respondent no. 7, that at the relevant point of time the respondent no. 7 was not holding any official post as an officer bearer of the managing committee of the concerned school. He resigned from his post on July 16, 2014.

Upon perusal of the order impugned, I find that the Commissioner of School Education was correct in holding that with regard to the prayer for monetary compensation as damages for an amount of Rs. 1 crore, the said authority was not competent to pass any order. This claim of the petitioner for damages on account of mental torture resulting in the death of his wife ought to be decided in an appropriate civil suit if otherwise permissible in law.

With regard to the allegations against the said authorities as also the other respondents who were erstwhile members of the managing committee, the Commissioner has correctly held that he was not their disciplinary authority and could not initiate any proceeding against them. Moreover such action has allegedly committed by such persons in their personal capacity.

The allegations against the private individuals as also the other authorities who have acted in private capacity, as stated in the writ petition, cannot be dealt with by the Commissioner of School Education, West Bengal nor the validity or correctness of such allegation be decided in this proceeding.

Under such circumstances, if the petitioner has any particular allegation against any individual, he is always at liberty to approach the appropriate authority for investigation into the matter.

With the above observations, the writ petition is disposed of. If any complaint is lodged with the investigating agency by the petitioner, the same will be considered strictlly in accordance with law.

It is made clear that this Court has not gone into the merits of the claims of the petitioner and the authority concerned will proceed independently.

This writ petition is disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs.

Urgent photostat certified copy of this order, if applied for, shall be supplied to the parties as expeditiously as possible.