Skip to main content

West Bengal Central School Service Commission & Ors. V/s Abdul Halim & Ors

 West Bengal Central School Service Commission & Ors. (Appellants)

VERSUS

Abdul Halim & Ors. (Respondents)

This appeal is against a final judgement and order of a Division Bench of Calcutta High Court dismissing the appeal by the Petitioners against an order passed by the Single Judge. And the reason was for the cancellation of the candidature, empanelment and selection of the Respondent for the post of Assistant Teacher in Arabic (Pass) in Jiaruddintoal High School, a Bengali medium academy in District Malda in West Bengal. 

 • The West Bengal Central School Service Commission had issued an announcement in Bengali daily “ Aajkaal”, inviting operations for the posts of Assistant Teacher. 

 • There were vacuities in the posts of two orders of preceptors, that is, the pass order for which the essential minimum educational qualification was Bachelor’s Degree in the Pass course from any UGC honored university having concerned subject as a combination subject of at least 300 marks at the degree position or 200 marks in the old 2- time Degree course, and the Honours/ Post Graduate Category for which the essential minimum qualification was Bachelor’s Degree with Honeys. Or alternately Master’s Degree in the concerned subject from any UGC honored university. For both the below orders qualification in Preceptors’ Training asB.T,B.Ed,P.G.B.Tetc. was desirable. 

 • Pursuant to the forenamed announcement the RespondentNo. 1 applied for the post of Assistant Teacher of Arabic in a Bengali medium academy in the format specified. The replier was educated outside the state of West Bengal and he didn't have Bengali as a subject either at the Secondary position or at the Advanced Secondary position or at the scale orpost-graduation position. 

• RespondentNo. 1 had successfully completed a one- time instrument course in Bengali conducted by the University of Delhi. 

 • After applying pursuant to the forenamed announcement along with clones of all instruments including the instrument course in Bengali, the RespondentNo. 1 was issued the admit card. 

 • The RespondentNo. 1 was successful in the written test after which a letter was issued to him asking him to appear for a personality test with a note that “ Your candidature is liable to be rejected at any stage, if you're plant ineligible”. 

 • The RespondentNo. 1 was asked to produce all documents in original to support of his eligibility, which he did, at the time of the personality test. The Appellant later invited the RespondentNo. 1 for the counselling process.

• After comforting, while the RespondentNo. 1 was awaiting appointment letter, he entered an impugned communication cancelling his recommendation/ empanelment and his selection to the School on the ground that he'd decided for a Bengali medium academy though he didn't have Bengali as a subject either at the Secondary or the Advanced Secondary or the scale position. 

 • The RespondentNo. 1 filed Writ Petition in Calcutta High Court, challenging the impugned communication on ground that he was eligible for the post, since he'd successfully completed instrument course in Bengali from the Delhi University. 

 • The Single bench Judge held that the statement of Marks issued by the University of Delhi, showed that the RespondentNo. 1 had successfully completed the Certificate Course in Bengali, and further progressed with the direction to the AppellantNo. 2 to offer appointment to the RespondentNo. 1 within a week. 

 • Being displeased by the judgement and order passed by the Single Judge, the Petitioners filed an appeal. 

• The Division Bench rejected the argument advanced on behalf of the Petitioners that a one time part time instrument in Bengali from the University of Delhi wasn't a course contemplated in Rule 5 (c) of the 2007 Rules. 

 • The Division Bench, by its order under appeal, directed AppellantNo. 2 to recommend RespondentNo. 1 for the appointment as Assistant Schoolteacher of Arabic (pass) in Bengali to the academy.

OBSERVATION OF THE COURT 

 The Court expressed the views that with the topmost of respect, the Division Bench as also the Single Judge failed to appreciate that the question of eligibility of the RespondentNo. 1 for the post of Assistant Schoolteacher of Arabic, in terms of Paragraph 2 of the Announcement and/ or Rule 5 (c) of the 2007 Rules, necessitates an enquiry into and determination of the factual issue of whether Bengali tutored in the Certificate Course conducted by the Department of Modern Indian Languages and Literary Studies of the University of Delhi was of a position advanced than the position of Bengali tutored at the Advanced Secondary position of the West Bengal Council of Advanced Secondary Education or any original Board. 

 A part time Certificate Course in a language, conducted by a University for graduates, isn't inescapably of a position advanced than the Advanced Secondary position of the West Bengal Council of Higher Education or original Board or for that matter, advanced than the Secondary position of the West Bengal Board of Secondary Education or an original Board. 

 In exercise of its power of judicial review, the Court has to see whether the decision  is vitiated by an apparent error of law. The test to determine whether a decision is vitiated by error apparent on the face of the record is whether the error is tone-apparent on the face of the record or whether the error requires examination or argument to establish it. However, on points where there may nicely be two opinions, it can not be said to be an error on the face of the record, If an error has to be established by a process of logic. Mallikarjuna reported in AIR 1960 SC 137. Still, the decision would not be open to hindrance by the writ Court, If the provision of a statutory rule is nicely able of two or further constructions and one construction has been espoused. It's only an egregious misapprehension of an applicable statutory provision or ignorance or casualness thereof, or a decision innovated on reasons which are easily wrong in law, which can be corrected by the writ Court by allocation of writ of Certiorari. 

The reach of power under Composition 226 may be wide enough to quash unreasonable orders. However, the same is liable to be struck down by a writ Court, If a decision is so arbitrary and capricious that no reasonable person could have ever arrived at it. However, the same may be regarded as perverse, If the decision can not rationally be supported by the accouterments on record. 

 Still, the power of the Court to examine the reasonableness of an order of the authorities doesn't enable the Court to look into the adequacy of the grounds in support of a decision to 

. examine the graces of the decision, sitting as if in appeal over the decision. The test isn't what the Court considers reasonable or unreasonable but a decision which the Court thinks that no reasonable person could have taken, which has led to manifest injustice. The writ Court doesn't intrude, because a decision isn't perfect In amusing and allowing the writ solicitation, the High Court has lost sight of the limits of its extraordinary power of judicial review and has in fact sat in appeal over the decision of the RespondentNo. 2. 

 In this case, it isn't in disagreement that the RespondentNo. 1 who had been educated outside the State of West Bengal, didn't have Bengali as a subject at the Secondary, Advanced Secondary, scale or post scale position. The interpretation of the last Clause of Paragraph 2 of the announcement and/ or Rule 5 (c) of the Rules, which reads must have succeeded in advanced position of education in that language paper by the authorities as success in the language paper at the scale position or the post scale position, or alternately an examination in the language paper of a position which is original to the position of the language as tutored in the scale position and not any part time course conducted by a University is a presumptive if not possible interpretation which ought not to have been obtruded with by the Writ Court. This Court can not but take judicial notice of the fact that universities don't generally allow scholars to conclude for a language subject at the scale position if the subject wasn't cleared at the Advanced Secondary position. As observed above documents adjoined by the RespondentNo. 1 reveal that campaigners who have studied the language at some position before the graduate position are barred from admission to the Certificate Course, which makes it egregious that the course is of abecedarian position. 

Significantly, the RespondentNo. 1 has not produced any document or instrument of the Delhi University certifying that the instrument course in Bengali is of a standard original to the Bengali language at the post-Advanced Secondary position. The judgment and order under appeal can not be sustained and the same is set away. Consequently, the appeal is allowed with no order as to costs.
Labels:

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Section 58B of The Advocates Act - Special provision relating to certain disciplinary proceedings

 Section 58B The Advocates Act Description (1) As from the 1st day of September, 1963, every proceeding in respect of any disciplinary matter in relation to an existing advocate of a High Court shall, save as provided in the first proviso to sub-section (2), be disposed of by the State Bar Council in relation to that High Court, as if the existing advocate had been enrolled as an advocate on its roll. (2) If immediately before the said date, there is any proceeding in respect of any disciplinary matter in relation to an existing advocate pending before any High Court under the Indian Bar Councils Act, 1926 (38 of 1926), such proceeding shall stand transferred to the State Bar Council in relation to that High Court, as if it were a proceeding pending before the corresponding Bar Council under clause (c) of sub-section (1) of section 56: Provided that where in respect of any such proceeding the High Court has received the finding of a Tribunal constituted under section 11 of the Indian B
Post a Comment
Read more

Case Laws related to Defamation in favour of ClaimantCase Laws related to Defamation in favour of Claimant. TOLLEY Vs, J.S FRY & SONS LTD – (1931) Facts The defendants were owners of chocolate manufacturing company. They advertised their products with a caricature of the claimant, who was a prominent amateur golfer, showing him with the defendants’ chocolate in his pocket while playing golf. The advertisement compared the excellence of the chocolate to the excellence of the claimant’s drive. The claimant did not consent to or knew about the advertisement. Issue The claimant alleged that the advertisement suggested that he agreed to his portrait being used for commercial purposes and for financial gain. He further claimed that the use of his image made him look like someone who prostituted his reputation for advertising purposes and was thus unworthy of his status. At trial, several golfers gave evidence to the effect that if an amateur sold himself for advertisement, he no longer maintained his amateur status and might be asked to resign from his respective club. Furthermore, there was evidence that the possible adverse effects of the caricature on the claimant’s reputation were brought to the defendants’ attention. The trial judge found that the caricature could have a defamatory meaning. The jury then found in favor of the claimant. Held The House of Lords held that in the circumstances of this case – as explained by the facts – the caricature was capable of constituting defamation. In other words, the publication could have the meaning alleged by the claimant. The Lords also ordered a new trial limited to the assessment of damages. NEWSTEAD V LANDON EXPRESS NEWSPAPER LTD, (1939) Facts: A newspaper published a defamatory article about Harold Newstead. However, another person with this name brought an action in libel. He claimed that the article had been misunderstood as leading to him. The defendant newspaper recognised that they published the article. Also, they denied that they had the intention of being defamatory of him. Consequently, the claimant argued that the newspaper was under a duty. The duty was to give a clear and complete description of the correct person. Moreover, the claimant argued that the defendants were in breach of the duty. Issues: The issue in Newstead v London Express Newspaper, was if the reasonable persons would have understood the words complained of to refer to the plaintiff. Held: The Court of Appeal stated that in accordance with the current law on libel, liability for libel does not depend on the intention of the defamer; but on the fact of the defamation. Accordingly, a reasonable man, in this case a newspaper publisher, must be aware of the possibility of individuals with the same name and must assume that the words published will be read by a reasonable man with reasonable care.

  Case Laws related to Defamation in favour of Claimant.  TOLLEY  Vs,  J.S FRY & SONS LTD – (1931) Facts The defendants were owners of chocolate manufacturing company. They advertised their products with a caricature of the claimant, who was a prominent amateur golfer, showing him with the defendants’ chocolate in his pocket while playing golf. The advertisement compared the excellence of the chocolate to the excellence of the claimant’s drive. The claimant did not consent to or knew about the advertisement.   Issue The claimant alleged that the advertisement suggested that he agreed to his portrait being used for commercial purposes and for financial gain. He further claimed that the use of his image made him look like someone who prostituted his reputation for advertising purposes and was thus unworthy of his status. At trial, several golfers gave evidence to the effect that if an amateur sold himself for advertisement, he no longer maintained his amateur status and might be aske
1 comment
Read more

Rules as to delivery of goods

                             Rules as to delivery of goods Section 2(2) of Sale of Goods Act defines ‘delivery’ as a ‘voluntary transfer of possession from one person to another.’ Thus, if the transfer of goods is not voluntary and is taken by theft, by fraud, or by force, then there is no ‘delivery. Moreover, the ‘delivery’ should have the effect of putting the goods in possession of the buyer. The essence of the delivery is a voluntary transfer of possession of goods from one person to another. There is no delivery of goods where they are obtained at pistol point or theft. 1. Mode of Delivery: According to Section 33, delivery of goods sold may be made by doing anything which the parties agree shall be treated as delivery or which has the effect of putting the goods in the possession of the buyer or of any person authorized to hold them on his behalf. Delivery of goods may be actual, symbolic or constructive. 2. Expenses of Delivery: According to Section 36(5), unless otherwise agree
Post a Comment
Read more