Calcutta High Court (Appellete Side)
(Subrata Kumar Majumdar vs The State Of West Bengal & Ors.) on 19 September, 2013
Author: Sambuddha Chakrabarti
Bench: Sambuddha Chakrabarti
CL (170) 19.09.2013 W. P. No. 22872 (W) of 2008
ah with
Ct-32 C. A. N. 4986 of 2011
(Subrata Kumar Majumdar -vs- The State of West Bengal & Ors.)
Mr. Anil Kr. Chattopadhyay
... for the petitioner.
Mr. Bhaskar Mitra,
Mr. R. M. Chattopadhyay
... for the respondents.
I propose to take the application along with the main writ petition for hearing with the consent of the parties. The petitioner joined in service under respondent No.2 in the year 1982 as a 'Sramik' and he thereafter was promoted as a Trainee Junior Operating Assistant. Subsequently, in the year 2002 he enhanced his qualification by obtaining A.M.I.E. in Electrical Engineering and then he prayed to the respondent authority for promoting him to the post of an Assistant Engineer.
Since nothing was done, he filed a writ petition in the year 2005 which was disposed of by a learned Single Judge of this Court by granting liberty to the petitioner to make a fresh representation before the respondent concerned and the respondent was directed to consider the case, if such representation was made. Then the petitioner filed a second writ petition in the year 2006 which was also disposed of by an order dated March 12, 2008 by this Court with liberty to the petitioner to submit a fresh representation seeking such 2 opportunity to appear in the limited Departmental Competitive Examination for promotion to the post of Assistant Engineer. It was specifically directed in the said order - "If such an application is filed, the concerned authority must take appropriate steps and there is no reason as to why that such writ petitioner shall not be permitted to appear in the next examination." His Lordship further made it absolutely clear that mere possession of better qualification will not entitle the petitioner to get the promotion which he can be provided only after he passes the limited Departmental Competitive Examination. Pursuant to the said order, the petitioner made a representation to the appropriate authority and the Deputy General Manager (P & A):SSC-I by a letter dated May 07, 2008 had informed the petitioner that the candidature against the said examination would be considered in future provided he after complying with all the requisite formalities applies in response to the Circular for the next such examination. This is the order impugned in the present writ petition.
Mr. Chattopadhyay, the learned Advocate for the petitioner, submits that this order is discriminatory inasmuch as the juniors who had enhanced their qualifications like the petitioner had already been given 3 promotion and the petitioner had been referred to the next Departmental Competitive Examination. Mr. Mitra, the learned Advocate for the respondent- company, submits that pursuant to the liberty given by this Court, the petitioner did not make any formal application and the application relied on by Mr. Chattopadhyay which has been annexed to the writ petition is of the year 2004. Mr. Mitra has handed up a statement of the application received from the departmentally qualified candidates in response to the Circular dated January 22, 2007 for appointment to the post of Assistant Engineer against the reserved quota. Mr. Mitra further submits that although others had participated, the present petitioner did not participate. Therefore, the question of his getting the promotion did not arise.
After hearing the learned Advocates for the parties and after going through the petition, it does not appear that the order impugned contains any infirmity. This Court while disposing of the earlier writ petition had made it very clear that the petitioner may be provided with a promotion after he passes the limited departmental examination and the communication made by the respondent-company is in line with the said observation made by this Court. All that the communication has said is that the petitioner's 4 candidature would be considered in future provided he complying with requisite formalities applied in response to the Circular for the next examination. This is the most that the respondents could do and they have assured the petitioner that if he applies after complying with the formalities, his candidature would be duly considered. There is absolutely nothing wrong in the order impugned and I find no reason for the petitioner to feel aggrieved.
In such view of it, the petitioner is not entitled to get the reliefs prayed for in the writ petition and the writ petition has no merit. Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of without any order.
In view of disposal of the main writ petition, the application for appropriate order has become infructuous and the same is disposed of accordingly.
(Dr. Sambuddha Chakrabarty, J.)