Calcutta High Court (Appellete Side)
Pradip Kumar Guria & Ors vs The State Of W. B. & Ors on 12 April, 2019
Author: Moushumi Bhattacharya
Bench: Moushumi Bhattacharya
1 12.04.
g.b. 2019 W. P. 5969(W) of 2019
06 Ct. No.17
Pradip Kumar Guria & Ors.
Vs.
The State of W. B. & Ors.
Ms. Reshmi Ghosh
Mr. Dipayan Kundu
Mr. Soumya Sankar Giri
.......For the Petitioners
Mrs. Supriya Dubey Chakraborty
.......For the S. S. C.
The writ petitioners applied for Bengali in the 1st S.L.S.T., 2016 for recruitment to the posts of Assistant Teachers in the upper primary level.
Learned counsel appearing for the petitioners submits that despite scoring high marks in TET for being considered for the post, none of the petitioners have been called for the 2nd phase of verification. Counsel submits that one Biswajit Hati despite scoring lower percentage in TET and lower marks in the academic performance, was called for the 2nd phase of verification to the exclusion of the petitioners. Counsel relies on Rule 12(3) of the West Bengal School Service Commission (Selection for Appointment to the Posts of Teachers for Upper Primary Level of Schools), Rules, 2016 to contend that under the said Rule, the only criterion mentioned is verification of 2 the validity of TET certificate, academic and professional qualification and other academic and professional qualifications as mentioned in Part-A of Schedule-II.
Learned Counsel appearing for the Commission relies on various sub-Rules of Rule 2 of the 2016 Rules under which categories of subject, medium of instructions, reservation and gender have been mentioned. Counsel submits that the application forms of the writ petitioners show that apart from the similarity of the subject being Bengali, the writ petitioners belong to different categories and gender which would be apparent from the application forms. Counsel submits that the difference in categories is a relevant consideration for the stage of verification under Rule 12(3) of the 2016 Rules.
Having considered the submissions of Counsel appearing for the parties, this Court is of the view that the online applications of the writ petitioners show that apart from the Bengali, the writ petitioners are either from male or female category or under the general or O.B.C. - 'B' category. It would therefore be fit to direct the Commission, as has been done in other similar orders, to consider the cases of the writ petitioners on the basis of the writ petitioners being placed in absolutely identical 3 circumstances for the subject Bengali and whether the writ petitioners can be considered for appropriate verification in appropriate categories. Since the Commission has all along been acting in pursuance of the 2016 Rules, the Commission will be at liberty to consider the case of the writ petitioners in a manner, which is compliant with the 2016 Rules. The Commission will also consider the case of the writ petitioners under the appropriate stage under Rule 12 of the 2016 Rules within two weeks from the week beginning 3rd June, 2019.
W. P. 5969 (W) of 2019 is disposed of in terms of the above directions.
It is made clear that this Court has not gone into the merits including the eligibility criteria of the petitioners in this case.
(Moushumi Bhattacharya, J.) 4