Calcutta High Court (Appellete Side)
Bimal Das vs The State Of West Bengal & Ors on 23 December, 2010
Author: Biswanath Somadder
Bench: Biswanath Somadder
1
23.12.10
(PP)
W.P. No. 20919 (W) OF 2010
Bimal Das
Versus
The State of West Bengal & Ors.
Mr. Ekramul Bari,
Mrs. Tanuja Basak
...for the petitioner.
Mr. Tulsidas Maity,
Mr. P. K. Ghosh
...for the Council.
Mr. Tapabrata Chakraborty
....for the State.
Affidavit of service filed in Court today be kept on record.
After considering the submissions made by the learned
advocate appearing on behalf of the petitioner and upon perusing
the instant application, it appears that the writ petitioner
participated in a recruitment process conducted by the Kolkata
Primary School Council as a sponsored candidate under the
exempted category. It is the admitted position that the name of
the writ petitioner was sponsored by the concerned employment
exchange. The grievance of the writ petitioner is that in spite of
participation in the recruitment process and being successful, the
Kolkata Primary School Council has kept his result withheld.
According to the learned advocate appearing on behalf of
the Kolkata Primary School Council, the reason why the writ
petitioner's name has been kept withheld, is due to the
2
verification process initiated by the Council on the basis of
directions given by the Director of School Education, West Bengal.
The verification process centers around the genuinity and veracity
of the exemption claimed by the petitioner on the strength of his
name recorded as such in the concerned employment exchange.
After considering the submissions made by the learned
advocates for the parties, this Court is of the view that when the
concerned employment exchange has registered the name of the
petitioner under the exempted category, it is the concerned
employment exchange alone which can doubt the eligibility of the
petitioner of being so empanelled; for it is the concerned
employment exchange which has empanelled the petitioner upon
scrutiny of his particulars and it is not within the competence of
the Council or for that matter any other authority of the State to
doubt such competence of the concerned employment exchange.
In this regard, the observations made by this Court in an earlier
order passed in W. P. 6339(W) of 2004 dated 21st April, 2004 may
be relied upon. The said judgment and order was rendered by
this Court in a case where the petitioners claiming to be land
evictees and registered as exempted category candidates by the
concerned employment exchange, were denied to be treated as
such by the concerned District Primary School Council. The
contention of the Council was negated by the Court with certain
observations, as rendered in the judgment and order dated 21st
April, 2004.
Having regard to the aforementioned judgment and order,
this Court directs the Director of School Education, West Bengal,
3
to consider the case of the writ petitioner in the light of the
observations made by this Court therein and take consequential
steps in the matter in accordance with law, preferably within a
period of four weeks, but not later than six weeks from the date of
communication of a photostat certified copy of this order.
In the event, the Director of School Education, West Bengal,
grants approval in favour of the writ petitioner, the Chairman of
the concerned Council shall issue appointment letter in favour of
the petitioner within a week therefrom.
Since no affidavits have been called for, allegations made in
the writ petition are deemed to be not admitted by the
respondents.
The writ petition stands disposed of accordingly.
(Biswanath Somadder, J.)