9911796707
TMI Blog2002 (5) TMI 867X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... tion of the school and as such as per circular dated 20th December, 1984 issued by the Director of School Education, West Bengal, the petitioner is entitled to get her approval as an organising assistant teacher of the said school and as such the Director of School Education, West Bengal may be directed to grant approval to the petitioner's appointment as has been done to other organising teachers of other schools whose name duly appeared in the District Level Inspection Team. 4. From the aforesaid order, it appears that the said writ application was disposed of upon hearing all the parties, namely, the State respondents and the Managing Committee of the school. The Director of School Education, West Bengal, in terms of the aforesaid order, however, accorded approval of appointment of the petitioner as Assistant teacher in Social Science Group in the concerned school with effect from 1.4.91 upon holding, inter alia, as follows: I have carefully considered the matter. The circular referred to by the learned advocate was subsequently superseded by other circulars relating to approval of appointment of organising teachers. Although the petitioners does not fulfill all the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... o have the approval of her service with effect from the date of recognition of the school, that is 1.1.87. It is further submitted that the Director of School Education, West Bengal, had no jurisdiction to pass any order on compassionate ground and as a consequence thereof the decision of the District Inspector of Schools concerned rejecting the petitioner's prayer also is illegal and contrary to the judgment as delivered by Mahitosh Majumdar, J. in the earlier writ application. 7. Despite direction no affidavit was filed on behalf of the State respondents opposing the writ application. Direction to file affidavit was given long time back on 4.10.96. However, the learned advocate appearing for the State respondents Mr. Ghosh submits that the impugned decision approving the service of the petitioner with effect from 1.4.91 was passed on consideration of availability of vacancy and accordingly the petitioner is not entitled to get any benefit. However, the learned advocate Mr. Ghosh has frankly conceded that the decision of the Director of School Education, West Bengal, was contrary to the observation passed by Mahitosh Majumdar, J. in his judgment dated 5.4.91. 8. Having r ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... asi judicial authorities, Courts and Tribunals of the concerned State. Further, it has been settled by the Apex Court that once a judgment reaches its finality, such judgment cannot be changed/modified by anybody except the higher Court and further it has been held by the Apex Court that even by amendment of rule, a judgment of a Court which reached its finality cannot be made mandatory. Reliance in this connection may be placed to the judgment in the case of Madan Mohan Pathak v. LIC (on bonus issue), , Constitution Bench judgment passed in the case of L.C. Golak Nath and Ors. v. State of Punjab and Anr., as well as view of this Court passed in the case Atmaram Kanoria and Ors. v. L.K.R Prasad and Ors., reported in 1990(1) CLJ 169 (para 15). Having regard to the legal position, accordingly it appears that the judgment of Mahitosh Majumdar, J. dated 5.4.91 was only the guiding factor for adjudication of the petitioner's case before the Director of School Education Department. However, from the decision of the Director of School Education, West Bengal it appears that the said authority passed a decision according approval of the service of the petitioner with effect from 1.4.91 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... aken by the State respondents in the earlier writ application all the officers of the State respondents accordingly are bound by the decision as adjudication is conclusive and final not only as to the actual matter determined but as to every matter which the parties might or ought to have litigated. Reliance may be placed to the case Forward Construction Co. and Ors. v. Prabhat Mandal (regd.). Andheri and Ors., , the relevant paragraphs of said report reads thus:- 20. So far as the first reason is concerned, the High Court in our opinion was not right in holding that the earlier judgment would not operate as res judicata as one of the grounds taken in the present petition was conspicuous by its absence in the earlier petition. Explanation IV to Section 11 CPC provides that any matter which might and ought to have been made ground of defence or attack in such former suit shall be deemed to have been a matter directly and subsequently in issue in such suit. An adjudication is conclusive and final not only as to the actual matter determined but as to every other matter which the parties might and ought to have litigated and have had it decided as incidental to essentially connecte ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ed by Mahitosh Majumdar. J. holding that the petitioner became entitled to be absorbed as organising staff of the school in terms of the circular letter dated 20.12.84, held otherwise and had given priority to the views expressed by the Director of School Education, West Bengal. Such action of the District Inspector of Schools concerned, who is a Government employee and bound by the judgment of Court, cannot be accepted. It is a very sorry state of affairs that herein in the State, some officers holding responsible positions are not following the directions of this Court, which happened in the instant case. Rule of law mandates that all authorities must obey the directions of Court. Hence, having regard to the issue in question, accordingly this Court is satisfied that the impugned decision of the Director of School Education, West Bengal as well as the District Inspector of Schools concerned, both are not sustainable in the eye of law as the same are contrary to the judgment passed by Mahitosh Majumdar, J. whereby the rights of the parties were crystalised by a judgment. Once the rights were crystalised, there was no scope before the said authorities to pass any other decision rel ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... orbed as organising teacher in terms of the circular letter dated 20.12.84, the judgment reached its finality and crystalised the rights of the parties, the petitioner's name appeared in DLIT report as has been held by Mahitosh Majumdar, J. and petitioner is the only organising staff, this Court without referring the matter back in passing a direction straightway directing the respondents concerned to accord approval of service of the petitioner with effect from 1.1.87 irrespective of availability of any post, and in the event of non-availability of post, by creating a supernumerary post and to release all arrear salaries, allowances and service benefits with retrospective effect from 1.1.87. This order is passed by this Court since under the circular letter dated 20.12.84, right of the organising teachers to have approval of service was granted with effect from the date of recognition of the school. Admittedly, the school got its recognition with effect from 1.1.87. In view of the special facts of the case and the conduct of the respondents in the Education Department, that is the Director of School Education, West Bengal and the District Inspector of Schools concerned, who de ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
