Apurba Sarkar v. State Of West Bengal And ORS.

24.01.2025 Court No.14 BP/AGM

IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA

CONSTITUTIONAL WRIT JURISDICTION WPA 9048 of 2024 Apurba Sarkar Vs.

State of West Bengal & Ors.

Mr. Mrityunjoy Chatterjee.

... for the Petitioner.

Mr. K. J. Yusuf.

Ms. Munmun Ganguly.

... for the State.

1. Affidavit-of-service filed in Court today be kept with the records.

2. The petitioner is the Headmaster of a Primary School and because of his designation he is the competent authority to be in charge of the Mid-Day Meal Project of the school. As the petitioner suffered an accident, he was not in a position to perform the duty of the Mid Day Meal Scheme and the concerned authority handed over the charge of the scheme to another teacher of the said school. After his recovery, the petitioner sought for handing over the documents in connection with the Mid Day Meal Project to him but the same was not done. The petitioner is aggrieved by the same.

3. Prayer has been made to direct the Block Development Officer to hand over the charge to the petitioner once again.

4. Learned advocate representing the State respondents submits, upon instruction that, the charge was handed over to a different teacher as the petitioner was indisposed. The teacher to whom the charge was handed over has retired in 2023.

5. It appears that during the absence of the petitioner, the Block Development Officer handed over charge of the project to a different teacher of the subject school to ensure that the project is not stalled in the mid way and the same remains functional.

6. As in terms of the guidelines published by the School Education Department, the duties and responsibilities of the Mid Day Meal Scheme are specified, accordingly, the Block Development Officer is directed to take necessary steps in the matter.

7. A representation from the petitioner is pending consideration at the end of the Block Development Officer. Let the same be considered in accordance with the prevailing guidelines at the earliest but positively within a period of four weeks from the date of communication of this order. Necessary consequential steps shall be taken by the Block Development Officer.

8. Learned advocate for the petitioner is directed to forward a copy of the representation dated 8th January, 2024 along with all supporting documents to the Block Development Officer at the time of communicating the order of the Court.

9. Instruction forwarded by the BDO is kept with the records.

10. The writ petition stands disposed of.

11. Urgent certified photocopy of this order, if applied for, be supplied to the parties expeditiously on compliance of usual legal formalities.

(Amrita Sinha, J.)