Sanjit Sarkar vs State Of West Bengal & Ors.

The writ petition is taken up under the heading ‘For Orders’ today. The records show that while the writ petitioner was functioning as a

headmaster of the concerned madrasah because of certain allegations made against him, the managing committee of the madrasah (respondent No. 8)

did not allow him to sign the attendance register or join the duties.

In the first round of litigation a coordinate Bench directed that the representation of the writ petitioner against this be considered and disposed of by

the President of the Board of Madrasah (respondent No. 4 in this writ petition). Such decision was taken in favour of the writ petitioner. This appears

from the last paragraph of the decision of the present respondent No. 4 appearing at annexure P/10. The concerned portion is at page ‘71’.

“Going through all the submission following points are to be noted:-

(1) Sanjit Sarkar, the Petitioner was appointed in Uttar Naoda Islamic Jr. High Madrasah, Uttar Dinajpur by the Secretary of the Madrasah. (2) He

received Rs. 2,16,000 from Govt. of India (SPQEM Scheme) through West Bengal Board of Madrasah Education Regional Office, Malda. (3) The

Secretary of the Madrasah alleged against his some unlawful activities like collection of money from some persons and absence in the madrasah

without any information. Due to these reasons Madrasah Authority has excluded his name from the list of teachers of the Madrasah. But the

Madrasah Authority has neither informed the matter to the Sanjit Sarkar, nor served any show cause notice to him for explanation. That is why the

matter of deletion of his name has not been done maintaining the procedure. Hence exclusion of his name cannot be approved at this stage.â€​

Apparently this was not given effect to by the respondent No. 8 herein. This relates to second round of litigation. By an order dated October 3, 2017 a

coordinate Bench in W.P. 21978(W) of 2016 had directed as follows:-

“Therefore, this Court directs the District Inspector of Schools (S.E.), Uttar Dinajpur, respondent no. 6 herein, to make an investigation into the

allegations made against the Managing Committee of the Madrasah concerned as to why the order passed by the President, West Bengal Board of

Madrasah Education has not been implemented and the benefit has not been allowed to the writ petitioner. The said District Inspector of Schools,

respondent no. 6, is directed to take appropriate steps and to pass a reasoned order within a period of six weeks from the date of communication of

this order, after giving an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner and Madrasah Authority and such other authorities as may be deemed fit by the said

District Inspector of Schools. After taking such decision, the same shall also be communicated to the petitioner and the Managing Committee of the

school.â€​

Pursuant to this order, the District Inspector of Schools concerned being the sixth respondent in this writ petition took a decision whose material part is

set out as follows:-

“In compliance of the order dated 03-10-2016 pased by His Lordship Hon’ble Justice Sahidulla Munshi, High Court Calcutta in W.P. No.

21978(W) of 2016 and keeping in mind the law points of the representations it is observed that there was no dispute with regard to the appointment of

the petitioner as an Assistant Teacher and then Headmaster. But the Madrasah Authority has neither informed the matter to the petitioner nor served

any show cause notice to him for explanation. Due to this the matter of deletion of his name has not been done maintaining the procedure. Hence the

exclusion of the name of the petitioner from the teachers list of the Madrasah can not be entertained at this stage and let the petitioner resumed to

function as the Headmaster of the Madrasah.â€​

Unfortunately the respondent No. 8 has not complied with either the order of the respondent No. 4 or the order of the respondent No. 6 and has not

given any reason why it has chosen to act thus. From the order sheet I find the coordinate Bench in the present writ petition took note of this defiance

by the 8th respondent and directed the Madrasah, respondent No. 8 to file a report before this Court within one week from November 10, 2017. Such

date has come and gone, but no report has been filed. I do not find from the records that any vakalatnama has been filed on behalf of either of the

respondent No. 8, Madrasah, respondent No. 9, Secretary to whom the Madrasah has been arrayed even though the affidavit of service on record

shows that all the respondents have been duly served. Thus I find no alternative but to prima facie hold that the respondent Nos. 8 and 9 are

deliberately acting in violation of the order of the Court and are not even coming before the Court.

However, I would not like to pass any draconian order without hearing the Secretary, respondent No. 9 who represents the respondent No. 8. Yet my

problem is that the State respondents are not coming before the Court and the only thing I can think of is forcing them to attend this Court- since

gentle orders even passed with firmness have not made any difference â€" I propose to consider the matter further on June 12, 2018 as the first

matter at the first sitting of the Court. Accordingly, let the Superintendent of Police, Uttar Dinajpur produce the respondent Nos. 8 and 9 along with

the papers relating to the case though without handcuffs before this Court at 10.30 a.m. in the forenoon on June 12, 2018.

I make it clear that if the Superintendent of Police is otherwise busy, any other superior officer of the police from the Uttar Dinajpur above the rank of

Inspector can be deputed by him. The said respondent Nos. 8 and 9 shall attend the pleasure of this Court leaving all other works aside and shall not

depart without the leave of the Court. On such occasion the matter may be decided on merits in the presence of the said respondent Nos. 8 and 9.

I also make it clear that the respondent Nos. 8 and 9 shall be entitled to have legal representation if they so desire. Let plain copy of the order be

communicated to the Superintendent of Police, Uttar Dinajpur within the course of tomorrow. Mr. Panda, appearing for the Respondent No. 2 is

requested to utilise radio telegraphic office in the Government Pleader’s office to ensure that this order is complied with.