Tarique Anwar vs The State of West Bengal and Others

Ashim Kumar Roy, J.—The father of the writ petitioner, who was an approved Assistant Teacher of Bengali Bazar High School, Garden Reach Road, Kolkata, died during his tenure of service on 6th August, 2001 leaving behind his widow, one daughter and two sons-one of them is the writ petitioner. After his death, the writ petitioner applied for inclusion of his name in the Live Register for appointment on compassionate ground before the appropriate authority. Since his such application was not considered, he moved a writ application being W.P. No. 3787(W) of 2009 before this Court and by an order passed on 18th June, 2009, a coordinate Bench of this Court directed the concerned Director of School Education, West Bengal, the respondent no. 2 to give a final decision as regards to the question of compassionate appointment of the writ petitioner within eight weeks from the date of communication of that order. The respondent no. 2 considered the writ petitioner''s prayer and rejected the same vide the Annexure P/6 to this writ application. Hence, this writ application.

The learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner submitted that the decision of the Director of School Education, West Bengal is essentially based on a Circular issued in the year 2009, namely, Government Circular No. 697-ES/S/IS-18/08 dated 09-07-2009. It is contended that the said Circular has no manner of application so far as the petitioner''s case is concerned, since he applied in the year 2002 for compassionate appointment long before the issuance of such Circular. He therefore, prays that such decision be quashed and the concerned respondent authority be ordered to include the name of the writ petitioner in the Live Register for appointment on compassionate ground.

On the other hand, the learned Counsel for the State, in his usual fairness, submitted that so far as the Government Circular referred to in the order impugned is concerned, the same has no manner of application in the case of the writ petitioner because he applied for appointment in die in harness category much before the issuance of the said Circular.

I have given my anxious and thoughtful considerations to the respective submissions of the parties.

Going through the impugned order, I find that the decision has been taken relying on a Government Circular issued on 9th July, 2009, whereas the petitioner''s right to be considered for inclusion of his name in the Live Register for appointment on compassionate ground, was accrued following the death of his father, who was an approved Assistant Teacher, in the year 2001, when the aforesaid Government Circular was not in vogue.

Having regard to such facts, the concerned respondent authority cannot deny the claim of the writ petitioner relying on such Circular giving to the same a retrospective effect.

It needs no debate that no right of a citizen can be denied by giving retrospective effect to any Circular or Government Order, which curtailed such rights.

Having regard to the facts as aforesaid, the order impugned cannot be sustained and is quashed.

In the result, this writ application is allowed and the concerned respondent authorities are directed to immediately take steps for inclusion of the name of the writ petitioner in the Live Register for his appointment on compassionate ground for the post of Assistant Teacher, if he is not otherwise ineligible.

Urgent Photostat certified copy of this order, if applied for, be given to the parties at an early date.