Allowed

Director of Madrasah Education v. Azad Mondal

Calcutta HC7 Dec 2020MAT/1890/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Single Judge's order disposed of a meritless appeal from the Calcutta High Court. Leave to appeal was granted after condoning a delay of 344 days. The Single Judge directed the Director of Madrasah Education to verify if petitioners were working with required qualifications under a 2016 notification and to decide their entitlement to salaries within six weeks. The appeal and connected applications

What did the court decide?

Delay of 344 days in filing appeal condoned. Certificate granted and appeal decided on same reasoning as a prior order. Writ petition treated as on day's list and disposed of.

Director of Madrasah Education Vs Azad Mondal — Service and Employment | Calcutta HC (2020)

¶1

07.12.2020 Item No.32 Ct. No.12 CHC

¶2

M.A.T.1890 of 2019 With

¶3

C.A.N.1 of 2019 (Old No.CAN 12445 of 2019) C.A.N.2 of 2020 (Old No.CAN 621 of 2020)

¶4

The Director of Madrasah Education, Government of West Bengal Vs.

¶5

Azad Mondal & ors.

¶6

Mr. Subhrangsu Panda

¶7

…for the State appellant

¶8

Mr. Biswaroop Bhattacharyya, Mr. Golam Mohiuddin, Ms. Rashmi Ghosh

¶9

…for the writ petitioner

¶10

Re: CAN 2 of 2020 (Old No. CAN 621 of 2020)

¶11

There is a delay of 344 days in preferring the appeal.

¶12

We have perused the petition for condonation of delay. We are satisfied with the explanations offered for not being able to file the memorandum of appeal within a period of limitation.

¶13

On such consideration, the delay of 344 days in filing the memorandum of appeal is condoned.

¶14

CAN 2 of 2020 (Old No. CAN 621 of 2020) is allowed.

¶15

Re: MAT 1890 of 2019

¶16

With

¶17

C.A.N.1 of 2019 (Old No. CAN12445 of 2019)

¶18

¶19

This appeal is arising out of an order dated 4^th December, 2018. The appellant preferred batch of appeal against similar order dated 28th May, 2019 which were disposed of by us by common order dated 27^th January, 2020.

¶20

We dispose of this appeal and the applications on the same reasoning as contained in the order dated 27^th January, 2020. However, for the sake of clarity we indicate below the directions that is also required to be followed in this case:-

¶21

To put an end to the controversy we direct the Secretary, Minority Affairs and Madrasah Education Department to ascertain whether the writ petitioners were working and possessing the required qualifications in terms of the notification dated 3^rd March, 2016 and whether their appointments were made in terms of the notification dated 3^rd March, 2016.

¶22

In the event the writ petitioners fulfilled the required criteria then we feel that the writ petitioner is entitled to interim measures in terms of the order dated 28^th May, 2019. We direct the authority concerned to decide this issue within a period of six weeks from date after giving an opportunity of hearing to one of the representatives of the writ petitioners as also the concerned Madrasah and dispose of such representation by a reasoned order which shall be

¶23

¶24

communicated to the writ petitioner within a week thereafter.

¶25

In view of the aforesaid direction there is no immediate need for the respondent authorities to release the salaries including the arrears as it would depend upon the factual consideration of the matter by the Secretary Minority Affairs and Madrasah Education Department in terms of our order.

¶26

It is needless to mention that in the event it is found that the writ petitioner is entitled to such salaries including arrears pursuant to the examination of the claims the writ petitioner in terms of the notification dated 3^rd March, 2016, the respondent authorities shall immediately release the salaries including the arrears payable as also their current salary and pass an appropriate direction to that effect.

¶27

The District Inspector of Schools shall furnish all details in relation to the Madrasah in which the writ petitioner is presently working as teacher in order to enable the Secretary, Minority Affairs and Madrasah Education Department to decide the matter finally within four weeks from the date of communication of this order by either of the parties.

¶28

The appeal and the application (C.A.N.12445 of 2019) and CAN 2 of 2020 (Old No. CAN621 of 2020) are disposed of.

¶29

¶30

In view of this order nothing remains in the connected writ petition to be decided. By consent of the parties the writ petition being W.P.22510 (W) of 2018 is treated as on day’s list and disposed of.

¶31

The appellant shall pay Rs.3000/- to the State Legal Services Authorities within one week from the date. If the said cost is not deposited in the aforesaid time the order passed by the learned Single Judge shall revive and the appeal shall stand automatically dismissed without any further reference to this Court.

¶32

The computer section as well as the concerned department shall take note of the order passed by us with regard to disposal of the appeal, applications and the writ petition.

¶33

Urgent Photostat certified copy of this order, if applied for be given to the parties on priority basis.

¶34

(Saugata Bhattacharyya, J.) (Soumen Sen, J.)

Director of Madrasah Education v. Azad Mondal

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Director of Madrasah Education v. Azad Mondal

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Amal Kr. Majhi & Ors. Vs State of West Bengal & Ors.

Tenzin Jampa Vs State of West Bengal

Khalilur Rahaman @ MD Khalilur Rahaman and Ors. Vs State of West Bengal

Hirak Banerjee Vs Union of India & Ors.

Prof Dr. Syamapada Ghorai Vs Narayan Swarup Nigam and Ors.

Mousumi Hati Vs Dr Hrishikesh Ray