Managing Committee Of Chuadanga Jr. High Madrasah At Hosnabad And ANR v. State Of West Bengal And ORS.

13.04.2023 (I.No.3) Ct.-18 (P.Jana)

IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA

CONSTITUTIONAL WRITJURISDICTION APPELLATE SIDE WPA 4146 of 2023 Managing Committee of Chuadanga Junior High Madrasah at Hosnabad & anr.

-Vs- The State of West Bengal & ors.

Mr. Sardar Amjad Ali, Sr. Adv.

Mr. Uttam Kumar Bhattacharyya, .... For the Petitioner.

Mr. Parikshit Goswami, ... For the State.

Mr. Nadeem Sulaiman, ... For the W.B. Board of Madrasah Education/respondent nos. 2, 3 & 4.

Supplementary affidavit to the writ petition and affidavit of service filed on behalf of the petitioners be kept with the record.

The petitioner no. 1 is the Managing Committee of Chuadanga Junior High Madrasah, District:

Paschim Medinipur and the petitioner no. 2 is its Secretary.

Sardar Amajad Ali, learned Senior Counsel, for the petitioners submits that in the year 2009, the West Bengal Board of Madrasah Education had granted temporary recognition for one year to the Chuadanga Junior High Madrasah and thereafter the Secretary of the Board, the respondent no. 4 herein, by a letter dated July 15, 2009 bearing Memo No: 2152 (Annexure P-1 to the writ petition) asked the petitioner no. 2 to comply with the conditions

mentioned in the said letter to get further extension. The Madrasah though has complied with all the said conditions and has deposited the requisite fees but till date, the Board has neither extended the said recognition nor has disposed of the representation of the Madrasah praying such extension.

Learned advocate for the Board submits that the representation of the petitioner no. 2 addressed to the respondent no. 4 can be disposed of in accordance with law.

In view of the aforesaid, WPA 4146 of 2023 is disposed of by directing the respondent authorities, the respondent no. 4 in particular, to dispose of the representation of the petitioner dated October 08, 2021 bearing Memo/Ref. No. CJHM/ERM/2021, being Annexure P-4 to the writ petition by a reasoned order after giving the petitioner no. 2 an opportunity of being heard, as expeditiously as possible in accordance with law, preferably within a period of four weeks from the date of communication of this order.

It is made clear that the petitioner no. 2 is at liberty to be represented by his learned Advocate. However, there shall be no order as to costs. Since no affidavit-in-opposition has been invited, the allegations made in the writ petition are deemed to have been denied by the respondents.

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

(Biswajit Basu, J.)