The Managing Committee, Shree Maheshwari Vidyalaya And ORS v. Anil Kumar Jha And ORS

IA No. GA 1 of 2021 IA No. GA 2 of 2021 RVWO No. 13 of 2021 with APO No. 147 of 2019

IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA

CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION The Managing Committee, Shree Maheshwari Vidyalaya & Ors.

Versus

Anil Kumar Jha & Ors.

Before:

The Hon'ble Justice I. P. MUKERJI And The Hon'ble Justice ANIRUDDHA ROY Date: 24th September 2021 Appearance:

Mr. Anjan Bhattacharya Advocate Ms. Anita Shaw, Advocate for the applicant Mr. Subhankar Datta, Advocate Mr. Debashis Sarkar, Advocate Mr. Paritosh Sinha, Advocate for the respondent Mr. Saktipada Jana, Advocate Ms. Ujani Pal (Samanta), Advocate for school authority The Court:

IA No. GA 1 of 2021 Sufficient cause is shown. Delay is condoned. The application for condonation of delay (IA No. GA 1 of 2021) under section 5 of the Limitation Act is allowed. We admit the review application.

IA No. GA 2 of 2021 RVWO No. 13 of 2021 We regret to note that the grounds made out in support of this application for review do not meet the requirements of Order XLVII Rule 1 of the Civil Procedure Code.

There were seven teachers in the commerce stream of the higher secondary school. One being an economics teacher and the other a mathematics teacher left the employment creating vacancies of two

teachers. The applicant wanted those vacancies to be treated as those for commerce teachers and claimed appointment based on his qualification and tenure of service in the school. The division bench held that those were reserved for economics and mathematics teachers and could not be filled up in the manner the applicant wanted.

Mr. Bhattacharya submits otherwise. He contends that there is an error apparent on the face of the records.

We are unable to accept this contention. At best it could be an error in the appreciation of the relevant rules or an error in arriving at a conclusion based on the facts and the rules read together, by the bench.

The remedy, if at all available, to the applicant lay in a properly constituted appeal against the impugned judgement and order. This review application is clearly not maintainable. In those circumstances, the review application (RVWO No. 13 of 2021) and the connected application (IA No. GA 2 of 2021) are dismissed.

No order as to costs.

(I. P. MUKERJI, J.) (ANIRUDDHA ROY, J.) R. Bose