Calcutta High Court
WPO/233/2026 of DINESH YADAV Vs STATE OF WEST BENGAL AND ORS on 21 August 2026
WPO No.233 of 2026 IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Constitutional Writ Jurisdiction ORIGINAL SIDE DINESH YADAV -VS- STATE OF WEST BENGAL & ORS. BEFORE: The Hon’ble JUSTICE AMRITA SINHA Date:21st August, 2026. Appearance : Mr. Anjan Bhattacharya, Adv. Ms. Seema Thakur, Adv. ...for the
OD-2 ORDER SHEET
WPO No.233 of 2026
IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA
Constitutional Writ Jurisdiction
ORIGINAL SIDE
DINESH YADAV
-VS-
STATE OF WEST BENGAL & ORS.
BEFORE:
The Hon’ble JUSTICE AMRITA SINHA
Date:21st August, 2026.
Appearance :
Mr. Anjan Bhattacharya, Adv.
Ms. Seema Thakur, Adv.
...for the Petitioner.
Mr. Sourav Ghosh, Adv.
Mr. Snehashis Sen, Adv.
...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 petitioner prays for approval of his service in terms of Memo no. 2116-GA/OM-8/95 dated 3rd November, 2011 issued by the Directorate of School Education, Grant-in-Aid Section.
2. The petitioner was appointed as Class-IV staff of a DA getting school with effect from 11th January, 2012. Prayer has been made to approve his service in terms of the aforesaid memorandum.
3. The prayer of the petitioner is pending consideration at the end of the District Inspector of Schools (S.E.), Kolkata.
4. Learned advocate representing the State respondents submits that the petitioner would not get the benefit of the subject memo as the said memo would be applicable in respect of the qualified non-teaching staff/librarian already working in the school. As the petitioner was appointed after the memo came into existence, accordingly, the petitioner would not get the benefit of the subject memo.
5. Be that as it may, as it appears that the District Inspector of Schools (S.E.), Kolkata is yet to take a decision on the petitioner’s prayer
2 seeking approval, accordingly, the instant writ petition stands disposed of by directing the District Inspector of Schools (S.E.), Kolkata to take a decision on the petitioner’s prayer in accordance with law after giving him a reasonable opportunity of hearing at the earliest, but positively within a period of twelve weeks from the date of communication of this order.
6. A reasoned order shall be passed and communicated to the petitioner immediately thereafter.
7. It is made clear that the Court has not gone into the merits of the prayer of the petitioner and all points are left open to be decided by the District Inspector of Schools (S.E.), Kolkata at the time of consideration of the petitioner’s prayer.
8. Learned advocate for the petitioner is directed to forward a copy of all relevant documents in support of his prayer for approval to the District Inspector of Schools (S.E.), Kolkata at the time of communicating the order of the Court.
9. The writ petition stands disposed of.
10. All parties are to act on the server copy of this order duly downloaded from the official website of this Court.
11. Certified server copy of this order, if applied for, be supplied to the parties or their advocate on record expeditiously on compliance of usual legal formalities.
(AMRITA SINHA, J.) nm