High Court relief for headmaster in mid-day meal fund defalcation case

Kolkata: The Calcutta High Court has quashed a criminal case against a headmaster of a school where he was accused of defalcation of government funds of about Rs 46 lakh for the mid-day meal scheme.

The bench of Justice Shampa Dutt (Paul) was moved by the accused headmaster seeking to quash the criminal case against him. The matter was heard by the court ex-parte as the opposite party counsel did not appear.

In the case, the complainant who is the president of the managing committee of Bhulanpur High School in Bankura alleged that between 2011 to 2015, there was no managing committee in the school. During this time, the headmaster, taking advantage of the absence of such a committee, misappropriated government grants of around

Rs 46,00,000, meant for mid-day meals in school. He alleged that repeated requests for clarifying the anomalies by the headmaster became futile as he was absent from his duty for more than a month. An enquiry initiated by District Inspector (DI) of Schools (S.E), Bankura also remained incomplete.

The court observed that the managing committee’s tenure was valid till 2014 but it got dissolved much before as all the members had tendered their resignation. To break the administrative deadlock created in the school, West Bengal Board of Secondary Education (WBBSE) had appointed an administrator for running it during the mentioned period (2011-2015) till the time a managing committee was formed. The court observed that the WBBSE order prima facie shows that the school was being run by the Administrator appointed by the said Department during the period the alleged defalcation took place. “The petitioner was in no way concerned with the running of the school and as such the question of prima facie defalcation for the period alleged does not arise,” court observed. The complainant also chose not to appear and contest the instant case. The court quashed the criminal case against the headmaster and also the judicial magistrate’s order that had rejected the prayer of the petitioner was set aside.