Calcutta High Court
WPA/21480/2023 of PIYALI JANA Vs STATE OF WEST BENGAL AND ORS. on 7 May 2026
AD/11/24 266312 NANDY (DO) In the High Court at Calcutta Constitutional Writ Jurisdiction Appellate Side WPA/21480/2023 Piyali Jana Vs. The State of West Bengal & Ors. Mr. Sabyasachi Mondal, Advocate Mr. Sarthak Dey, Advocate Ms. Payel Khanra, Advocate …...for the Petitioner Mr.
AD/11/24
266312
NANDY
(DO)
In the High Court at Calcutta
Constitutional Writ Jurisdiction
Appellate Side
WPA/21480/2023
Piyali Jana
Vs.
The State of West Bengal & Ors.
Mr. Sabyasachi Mondal, Advocate
Mr. Sarthak Dey, Advocate
Ms. Payel Khanra, Advocate
…...for the Petitioner
Mr. Debnarayan Banerjee, Advocate
Mr. Md. Ahsanuzzaman, Advocate
……for the State
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
0
Decisions referred to
In this index
0
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
1. The report filed by the District Inspector of Schools is taken on record.
2. The petitioner’s grievance is that she has not been given the increment, even though she had enhanced her qualifications while in service.
3. The District Inspector of Schools, in his report, has mentioned that the increment cannot be given to the petitioner in view of the fact that the petitioner did not obtain prior permission for pursuing her degree in M.Sc. It appears from the resolution meeting book, disclosed with the writ petition, that the Additional District Inspector of Schools had granted permission on 22.06.2010 to pursue her M.Sc. degree.
4. It is obvious that the report of the D.I. dated 10.11.2023 has not considered such prior permission taken from the Additional District Inspector of Schools.
5. In view of the afore-stated, the finding of the D.I. that the petitioner had not taken prior permission, is set aside.
6. The D.I. is directed to consider the representation of the petitioner dated 27.07.2023, upon giving a hearing to the petitioner with adequate prior notice.
7. The petitioner will be entitled to disclose all requisite particulars, including the approval given to her by the Additional District Inspector of Schools.
8. The entire process shall be completed by 30.06.2026.
P a g e | 2
9. The representation will be disposed of by a reasoned order and the resultant order of such consideration will be communicated to the petitioner by July 15, 2026.
10. If the petitioner is found to be eligible and entitled, the concerned D.I. will take all requisite steps to ensure that the petitioner gets the relevant increment.
11. With the afore-stated directions, the writ-petition is disposed of. There shall, however, be no order as to costs.
12. All parties including the school authority will act on a server copy of this order.
(Reetobroto Kumar Mitra, J.)