Calcutta High Court (Appellete Side)
Ag (Ashalata Das vs The W. B. Board Of Primary Education & ... on 21 August, 2015
Author: Debangsu Basak
Bench: Debangsu Basak
1 W. P. 20114 (W) OF 2015 21.08.2015 ag (Ashalata Das -vs- The W. B. Board of Primary Education & Ors.) Sl. No.12 Court no.13 Mr. Kajal Ray - for the Petitioner Mr. Subir Sanyal Mr. Ratul Biswas - for the Board Mr. Kamalesh Bhattachazrya Mr. Aninda Bhattacharya - for the D. P. S. C. Affidavit of service filed today is kept with the record. The writ petitioner claims that she was not allowed to enter the office of the Chairman/Chairperson of the concerned District Primary School Council for collecting documents to appear in the forthcoming Teacher Eligibility Test (hereinafter referred to as 'the TET'), as she had not downloaded the acknowledgement receipt of the earlier TET. She is an unsuccessful TET 2012 candidate. Relying upon a notification dated July 5, 2015, it has been submitted on behalf of the writ petitioner that she should be allowed to participate in the forthcoming TET. She claims that she has made a general diary to the effect that she has not been allowed to enter the office of the Chairperson. She has also made a representation to the Chairperson of the concerned council. It is contended on her behalf that the Chairperson should be directed to consider and dispose of the said representation.
The Board and the Council authorities are represented. Referring to the notification dated July 5, 2015 issued on behalf of the Board, it is contended by the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the Board that a time period was fixed for the persons who are not in possession of the original TET admit card or do not have photocopies thereof along with downloaded acknowledgement receipt or photocopies of the TET 2012 examination. It is further 2 contended that the writ petitioner did not attend the office and therefore, has lost her chance.
I have considered the rival contentions of the parties and the materials made available on record.
I had called upon the learned counsel for the writ petitioner to produce the copy of the general diary made on that particular date. Photocopy of a general diary has been produced. The same is dated July 23, 2015. The general diary speaks of a request to the Officer-in- Charge, Egra Police Station to make available the acknowledgement receipt of the earlier TET examination. Such general diary does not disclose that the writ petitioner had been to the office in terms of the notification and she had been prevented from entering into the office.
In such circumstances, the averments to the contrary in the writ petition are disbelieved. Since the writ petitioner did not make any attempt to comply with the notification dated July 5, 2015, no useful purpose would be subserved by directing the Chairperson of the concerned Council to dispose of the representation made by the writ petitioner.
I find no merit in the instant writ petition. The same is dismissed without any order as to costs.
The photocopy of the general diary produced before this Court is kept with the record.
Urgent photostat certified copy of this order, if applied for, be furnished on priority basis.
(Debangsu Basak, J.)