State Of West Bengal & Ors. vs Md. Jahangir Laskar & Ors.

This writ appeal by the State of West Bengal and two of its officers is directed against an order dated November 11, 2010 passed by a learned Judge

of this Court. By such order, the learned Judge while allowing W.P. No.21202 (W) of 2004 directed the relevant district inspector of schools to

approve the appointment of the writ petitioner (respondent no.1 before us) within a period of four weeks.

It was further directed that once such appointment is approved, the writ petitioner shall be entitled to receive salary and other benefits month by month

without any interruption. In passing such order, the learned Judge relied on the decision of the Supreme Court reported in 2007 (11) SCC 92 [U.P.

State Electricity Board â€"vs.- Pooran Chandra Pandey & Ors.].

Mr. Majumder, learned Government Pleader appearing for the appellant contends that the decision in Pooran Chandra Pandey (supra) was not good

law as on date the writ petition was allowed, - the same having been overruled by the Supreme Court in the decision reported in (2008) 10 SCC 1

[Official Liquidator â€"vs.- Dayanand and Ors.].

That apart, it is contended by Mr. Majumder that the appointment of the writ petitioner having been made in contravention of the statutory rules,

question of approval of appointment did not and cannot arise. Appearing on behalf of the writ petitioner, Mr. Manna, learned advocate has very fairly

submitted that the order under appeal cannot be supported by him.

However, he also submitted that the writ petition may be directed to be heard on merits by the writ court, upon setting aside the order under challenge.

We find the submission of Mr. Manna to be sufficiently reasonable. The order under challenge stands set aside, with the result that the writ petition

would revive on the file of the writ court.

A copy of the writ petition shall be served on Mr. Dhole, learned advocate-onrecord for the appellants by Mr. Manna in course of tomorrow. The

appellants, who are respondents in the writ petition, are granted four weeks’ time to file affidavit-inopposition; reply thereto, if any, may be filed by

the writ petitioner by two weeks thereafter. The parties shall be at liberty to move the learned Judge having determination to hear the writ petition

seeking its early disposal.

Since we have remitted the writ petition for fresh hearing before the learned Judge, we refrain from expressing any opinion regarding the merits of the

appellants’ claim. The appeal stands allowed and the connected application, if any, stands disposed of. There shall be no order for costs. Urgent

photostat certified copy of this order, if applied for, be furnished expeditiously.