Disposed¶19

Atri Sengupta v. State of West Bengal and Ors.

Calcutta HC25 Aug 2025MAT/1111/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

teacher transfer; willing teacher; local arrangement; notification dated 3rd January, 2022; DI (SE) District Inspector of Schools (SE); Nandigram-II Block; memo dated 13th August, 2024 set aside; WPA 22368 of 2023; MAT 1111 of 2025; CAN 2 of 2025; Gokul Chandra Mallick MAT 1218 of 2024; SSC; WBBSE; State of West Bengal; resultant vacancy; three-month timeline; no order as to costs.

What did the court decide?

Appeal and connected application for stay disposed of: memo dated 13th August, 2024 set aside; impugned order dated 10th January, 2025 modified directing the DI (SE) (respondent no. 6) to act in strict consonance with the notification dated 3rd January, 2022 and take expeditious steps to fill the resultant vacancy, preferably within three months; no order as to costs. ¶19

Atri Sengupta Vs State of West Bengal and Ors. — Calcutta HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶19

Issue for consideration

Whether the notification dated 3rd January, 2022 requires the DI (SE) to find a willing teacher from a neighbouring school to temporarily man the transfer-seeking teacher's post before the transfer can be effected. +2 more

¶15

Court's answer

The notification dated 3rd January, 2022 contains no requirement that the DI (SE) endeavour to find a willing teacher of a neighbouring school to man the post temporarily; the term 'willing' does not feature in the notification.

¶15

Ratio / Principle

The appellant's claim for transfer cannot be kept in abeyance till a willing teacher is found.

¶15

Key takeaways

The memo dated 13th August, 2024 is set aside.ratio¶16
The order impugned in the appeal is modified to the effect that the DI (SE) shall act in strict consonance with the notification dated 3rd January, 2022 and the observations in the order, and take expeditious steps for filling up the resultant vacancy that may arise after the appellant is transferred.ratio¶16
The entire exercise shall be completed by the DI (SE), respondent no. 6, preferably within a period of three months from the date of communication of the order.

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Appeal (MAT 1111 of 2025, decided 25.08.2025) against order dated 10th January, 2025 in WPA 22368 of 2023, by which the learned single Judge had directed that the appellant-teacher's transfer application dated 6th July, 2022 would be acted upon if a willing teacher were found to man her post. Held: the notification dated 3rd January, 2022 contains no rider requiring the DI (SE) to make any endeavour to find a willing teacher of a neighbouring school to temporarily man the post, and the term 'willing' does not feature in the notification; a transfer claim cannot be kept in abeyance till a willing teacher is found. The memo dated 13th August, 2024 issued by respondent no. 6 inviting willing teachers for local arrangement was set aside; the impugned order was modified to direct the DI (SE) to act in strict consonance with the notification and take expeditious steps to fill the resultant vacancy, preferably within three months from communication of the order. Appeal and connected stay application disposed of; no order as to costs.

¶1

7 25.08.2025 Ct. No. 11 rrc

¶2

MAT 1111 of 2025 with IA No. CAN 2 of 2025 (Atri Sengupta Vs. The State of West Bengal & Ors.)

¶3

Mr. Shuvro Prokash Lahiri Mr. Rajesh Naskar Mr. Ankan Mondal

¶4

…. For the appellant

¶5

Mr. Sirsanya Bandopadhyay, Sr. Stng. Consl. Mr. Arindam Chattopadhyay Ms. Lipika Chatterjee …… For the State

¶6

Mr. Sunit Kr. Roy ……. For the SSC

¶7

Ms. Koyeli Bhattacharyya …… For the WBBSE

¶8

The present appeal has been preferred challenging an order dated 10^th January, 2025 passed in the writ petition being WPA 22368 of 2023 which was preferred by the writ petitioner/appellant herein, inter alia, praying for issuance of necessary direction upon the respondents to consider her application for transfer dated 6^th July, 2022. During pendency of the writ petition, a memo dated 13^th August, 2024 was issued by the respondent no. 6 requesting all heads of the schools under Nandigram-II Block to send the name of a willing teacher, who can man the post of the appellant for ensuring local arrangement in the schools in terms of the notification dated 3^rd January, 2022.

¶9

¶10

Mr. Lahiri, learned advocate appearing for the appellant submits that the notification dated 3^rd January, 2022 casts a duty upon the DI (SE) to take urgent step in a time-bound manner to search for a teacher on the same subject from nearby and make local arrangement so that the teacher of the other school attends the school wherefrom the teacher has applied for transfer on days of the week on a temporary basis till such time a permanent teacher joins. There is no provision in the notification dated 3^rd January, 2022 to invite any option or choice of any other teacher to volunteer in rendering service to the school from where the appellant seeks transfer and that as such the learned single Judge erred in law in observing that ‘in the event a willing teacher is found who can man the post of the petitioner steps shall be taken by the concerned District Inspector of Schools (SE) to transfer the petitioner based on her transfer application dated 6^th July, 2022’ . In support of such contention reliance has been placed upon a judgment of a coordinate Bench of this Court delivered in the case of Gokul Chandra Mallick Vs. The State of West Bengal & Others (MAT 1218 of 2024).

¶11

Mr. Chattopadhyay, learned advocate appearing for the State respondents submits that the learned single Judge has rightly directed that in the event a willing teacher is found who can man the post of the appellant, steps shall be taken by the respondent no. 6 to transfer the appellant.

¶12

¶13

Mr. Roy, learned advocate appearing for the Commission submits that no allegations have been levelled against the Commission in the writ petition.

¶14

We have heard the learned advocates appearing for the respective parties and considered the materials on record.

¶15

In the notification dated 3^rd January, 2022 there is no rider that the DI (SE) has to make any endeavour to find out any willing teacher of neighbouring school, who can man the post of the appellant temporarily till the regular incumbent joins the post. The term ‘willing’ does not feature in the said notification. The appellant’s claim for transfer cannot be kept in abeyance till a willing teacher is found.

¶16

Accordingly, the memo dated 13^th August, 2024 is set aside and the order impugned in the present appeal is modified to the effect that the DI (SE) shall act in strict consonance with the provisions of the said notification dated 3^rd January, 2022 and the observations made in this order and take expeditious steps for filling up the resultant vacancy that may arise after the appellant is transferred.

¶17

The entire exercise shall be completed by the DI (SE) being the respondent no. 6 herein preferably within a period of three months from the date of communication of this order.

¶18

¶19

With the above observations and directions, the appeal and the connected application for stay are disposed of.

¶20

There shall, however, be no order as to costs.

¶21

Urgent photostat certified copy of this order, if applied for, be supplied to the parties, upon compliance of all requisite formalities.

¶22

(Reetobroto Kumar Mitra, J.) (Tapabrata Chakraborty, J.)

Atri Sengupta v. State of West Bengal and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Atri Sengupta v. State of West Bengal and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

The State of West Bengal and Ors. Vs Arijit Bhattacharya and Ors.

Zishan Rana Halder Vs Union of India and Ors.

The West Bengal Board of Madrasah Edu. Vs Managing Commitee of Chuadanga Junior Madrash at Hosnabad and Ors.

Debasis Upla and Ors. Vs Mr. Milind K Deouskar, the General Manager, Eastern Railway

Jahanara Bibi @ Jahanara Begam @ Jahanara Mondal @ Janu Vs Union of India and Ors.

Baisakhi Saha Vs State of West Bengal and Ors.