Sahanaj Akhtary vs The State of West Bengal and Others

Hon''ble Mr Justice Jayanta Kumar Biswas

The Court: The petitioner in this WP under art. 226 dated November 12, 2008 is questioning a decision of the Block Development Officer, Harischandrapur-I, Malda, a copy whereof was sent to her by a memo dated July 14, 2008. By the decision the BDO directed the Secretary of a Gola More SSK to explain, inter alia, the circumstances concerning the petitioner''s appointment in the SSK as the third Sahayika. The BDO informed the Secretary of the SSK that an inquiry conducted by his office had revealed illegality in the petitioner''s selection for appointment to the post. He directed that during pendency of the matter the petitioner should not be paid honorarium.

It is not disputed that the petitioner was selected for appointment to the post. The allegation was that since her mother-in-law was a member of the Managing Committee of the SSK, she was not eligible for the post. It is not disputed that the petitioner''s mother-in-law was a member of the Managing Committee at the date she was selected for the post.

Mr. Das appearing for the petitioner has argued that since the petitioner''s mother-in-law was an Ex-officio Member of the Managing Committee, in view of a clarificatory Government Order dated May 02, 2008 there was no prohibition against appointing the petitioner; and that, in any case, after approval of the appointment the Managing Committee could not remove the petitioner who, under any circumstances, was entitled to honorarium for the period she was in employment.

I am unable to see how the clarificatory Government Order dated May 02, 2008 is relevant. It was applicable to appointment of Samposarak and Samposarika in MSK. In any case, it does not say that a near relation of a member of a Panchayatraj Body who is also a member of the Managing Committee of an MSK can be appointed as a Samposarak or Samposarika in the MSK.

The procedure that was admittedly applicable to the selection in question clearly prohibited against engagement of a near relation of a member of the Managing Committee of an SSK as a Sahayika therein. I am, therefore, unable to accept that the petitioner''s appointment was permissible. Her mother-in-law was a member of the Managing Committee of the SSK.

Simply because the appointment was approved, the illegality that vitiated the selection itself did not disappear. The illegality was detected by the office of the BDO by making an inquiry. I am, therefore, unable to see how the selection and appointment could be legalized by any superior authority.

I am, however, of the view that till the date the petitioner was in employment, she was entitled to honorarium. It has been submitted that the petitioner was not paid any honorarium. In my opinion, she should be paid honorarium till the date the Managing Committee of the SSK removed her. For these reasons, I dispose of the WP ordering as follows. The respondents shall pay the petitioner honorarium from the date of engagement till the date the Managing Committee of the SSK removed her. Compliance within four weeks from the date this order is served. No costs. Certified xerox.