Calcutta High Court (Appellete Side)
17232W/2009 on 4 May, 2011
Author: Jyotirmay Bhattacharya
Bench: Jyotirmay Bhattacharya
1
011 W.P. 17232 (W) of 2009
Mr. Arindam Chatterjee.
...For the Petitioner.
Mr. K.M. Yusuf.
...For the State.
It is submitted by Mr. Chatterjee, learned advocate appearing for the petitioner that the 1)
Director, Paschim Banga Rajya Sarva Siksha Mission, 2) The Secretary, Sahebnagar High School and 3)
Teacher-in-charge of the said school who were impleaded as respondent no.2, 5 and 6 respectively are
not necessary parties as neither any releif has been claimed against them in this writ petition nor their presence is necessary for effective adjudication of the dispute involved in this writ petition.
As such, Mr. Chatterjee, learned advocate prays for leave to expunge them from the cause title of the writ petition. Such leave is granted.
Let supplementary affidavit filed by the petitioner in court today be kept with the record and the same be treated as a part of this writ petition.
The petitioner was an aspirant for the post of para teacher in Geography (Male) in Sahebnagar High School in the District of Murshidabad. Pursuant to the advertisement issued by the school authority in Ananda Bazar Patrika, the petitioner applied for the said post in 2008. The petitioner claims that the petitioner completed his graduation in Geography (Hons.) from Tilka Majhi Bhagalpur University in the year 2007. The petitioner further claims that since the original certificate was not issued by the concerned University in 2008, the petitioner could not produce the original certificate in respect of his graduation degree at the time of submission of his application for the said post.
The petitioner was allowed to participate in the selection process, after considering his application as well as other testimonials submitted by him, by the concerned authority.
Subsequently, the candidature of the petitioner was cancelled as the petitioner failed to produce his original pass certificate of his degree course at the time of submission of his application for the said post of Additional Para Teacher in the said school.
The petitioner is aggrieved and as such the petitioner has come before this court with this writ petition seeking appropriate reliefs.
Mr. Chatterjee, learned advocate appearing for the petitioner submits that since the convocation was held in the said University in 2009, the delivery of the original certificate was withheld till the date of holding such convocation in the said University. However, the provisional certificate was issued to him by the said University in 2007.
2Mr. Chatterjee further submits that the condition regarding production of the original marksheet along with application which was laid down in the guide lines issued by the Sarva Siksha Mission for appointment of the Para Teacher in the school is unreasonable and as such the said condition should not be given any effect to by the concerned authority.
This court does not find any substance in such submission of Mr. Chatterjee as it is well settled that if a candidate wants to participate in the selection process, he is required to fulfil all the terms and conditions which were laid down by the authority regarding the eligibility criteria of the candidate for the said post. Since the petitioner offered his candidature for the said post, he, in my view, cannot challenge the eligibility criteria which is laid down by the authority in the aforesaid guidelines.
As such, the contention of the petitioner to the effect that the said eligibility criteria should be struck down as an unreasonable one, cannot be accepted by the court.
Since admittedly, the petitioner failed to fulfil the said condition by producing the original certificate at the time of submission of his application for the said post, this court does not find any illegality and/or unreasonableness in the impugned order which is under challenge in this writ petition particularly when it is categorically mentioned therein that provisional certificate cannot be considered as a testimonial of his qualification.
Under such circumstances, this court does not find any merit in this writ petition, the writ petition stands rejected.
Urgent Xerox certified copy of this order, if applied for, be supplied to the learned advocate for the petitioner immediately.
dp ( Jyotirmay Bhattacharya, J )