JEEVA SHIVA MISSION KIRAN CHANDRA GIRLS HIGH SCHOOL.

Mr. A. K. Lahiri, Mr. A. K. Ghosh, Mr. A. Santra, Mr. U. Roy..............for the respondent no.5. The managing committee of the school intended to proceed against the respondent no.5/teacher departmentally and, accordingly, placed her under suspension. In terms of Rule 28(9)(viia) of the Management of Recognised Non-Government Institutions (Aided and Unaided) Rules 1969 (hereafter the 1969 Rules), the step to place a teacher under suspension is required to be forwarded to the West Bengal Board of Secondary Education (hereafter the Board) for approval. The managing committee approached the Board seeking such approval. At the same time, the managing committee sought for approval of first stage of disciplinary proceeding. Since the Board had not given its decision on the prayers of the managing committee, this writ petition was presented before this Court on 12.11.2014 seeking, inter alia, the following relief: "a) a writ in the nature of mandamus directing the concerned respondents particularly the respondent no.2 herein to forthwith consider and decide on the proposal of the Managing Committee for grant of approval of first stage of the disciplinary proceeding against the said respondent no.5 being Annexure - P/8 and P/9 respectively without any further delay; b) a writ in the nature of mandamus directing the concerned respondents particularly the respondent no.2 herein not to proceed with the appeal being Annexure - P/12 preferred by the respondent no.5 pending consideration of the proposal of the Managing Committee for grant of approval of first stage of the disciplinary proceeding against the said respondent no.5;" On 12.11.2014 itself, the Administrator of the Board passed an order which has been placed before me by Mr. Lahiri, learned advocate appearing for the respondent no.5. It has been held in such order that the prevailing circumstances do not warrant placing of the respondent no.5 under suspension and, accordingly, the proposal of the managing committee in this regard has not been approved. Since the order of the Administrator was passed on the very date the writ petition was presented, such order is obviously not under challenge in this writ petition. Any challenge thereto in course of arguments cannot be entertained. It shall be open to the managing committee to question the legality and/or propriety of such order by instituting appropriate proceedings in accordance with law. Insofar as the prayer of the managing committee for an order on the Board to grant approval of first stage of the disciplinary proceeding against the respondent no.5 is concerned, I am of the view that the stage is not mature enough for consideration as to whether such an order ought to be passed. Rule 28(8) of the 1969 Rules has been interpreted by the Special Bench of this Court in the decision in Arun Kumar Hait Vs. State of West Bengal & Ors., 1999 (1) CHN 521. The first stage approval of the Board is required only when upon an enquiry into the conduct of the delinquent staff being conducted in accordance with law, the managing committee upon consideration of the representation of the delinquent staff against the enquiry report accepts the findings contained in such report and proposes to proceed further against the delinquent staff for taking disciplinary action. Admittedly, in this case, the reply of the respondent no.5 to the charge-sheet was received but no enquiry officer has been appointed. The managing committee, therefore, was not justified in seeking first stage approval without the change(s) against the respondent no.5 being proved. The managing committee shall, therefore, be free to appoint an enquiry officer for the purpose of conducting the disciplinary proceeding and taking the same to its logical conclusion in accordance with law and the observations in Arun Kumar Hait (supra).