Calcutta High Court (Appellete Side)
Vacation Bench vs The State Of West Bengal & Ors on 27 December, 2018
Author: Arindam Mukherjee
Bench: Arindam Mukherjee
1
W.P. 26263(W) of 2018
6 27.12.2018
SB Ct. No. 6 Najrul Sk.
Vacation Bench vs.
The State of West Bengal & Ors.
Ms. Priyakshi Banerjee
..... For the Petitioner
Mr. Sirsanya Bandyopadhyay
Mr. Milan Kumar Maity
.... For the State
A recruitment process for appointment to the post of
"Auxiliary Fire Operator" to be selected from Civil Defence
Volunteers of Nadia District on a contractual basis under the
West Bengal Fire & Emergency Services was challenged by
several candidates who participated in such recruitment
process by filing separate writ petitions which were taken up
together and disposed by a common order dated
30.11.2015. The operative portion of the said order is set out
hereunder for convenience:-
"For reasons stated above, this Court is of the view
that the Director General, West Bengal Fire & Emergency
Services, shall revisit the vacancy position throughout the
State of West Bengal and if vacancies are available,
consider the petitioners' case for being appointed to the
posts-in-question, provided of course, they are otherwise
eligible and/or entitled to, in accordance with law.
Let a copy of this order be forwarded to the learned
Government Pleader, West Bengal, by the learned Registrar
General of this Court. Upon receipt of the same, the
learned Government Pleader shall write to the Chief
Secretary, Government of West Bengal, enclosing a copy of
this order so that it could be widely circulated amongst all
State Ministers/Departments/ and Offices right upto the
Block level, for guidance in respect of preparation of note-
sheets/orders
All the writ petitions are accordingly disposed of."
No appeal had been preferred from the said order. It
2
was, therefore, incumbent upon the concerned authority to
revisit the vacancy position through out the State of West
Bengal and if vacancies were available to consider the
petitioners' case for being appointed to the post in question
subject to being otherwise eligible and / or entitled to in
accordance with law. It is not clear at this stage whether the
word "petitioners" include the writ petitioner in the instant writ
petition. There is no communication from the authorities
concerned after revisiting the vacancy position in terms of
the order dated 30th November, 2015. It is also not known as
to why the petitioner's name was not considered though his
name figured in the earlier list when fresh vacancies have
been detected against which new appointment procedure
has been initiated. It is, however, clear that vacancies
remained and persons out of the previous list dated 13th
July, 2012 has not been considered. The respondent
authorities have issued a notice for fresh recruitment of "Auxiliary Fire Operator" from the enlisted candidates from civil defence without considering the case in the light of the order dated 30th November, 2015, The writ petitioner submits that unless the case of the writ petitioner is considered in the light of the order dated 30.11.2015, the respondent authorities could not have published notice for fresh appointment from a new panel of enlisted candidates from civil defence as that would impliedly cancel the panel in which the petitioner's name was enlisted.
Learned Junior Standing Counsel appearing on behalf of the State submits that the vacancy position had been revisited in terms of the order dated 30.11.2015 and only thereafter considering the fresh vacancy, the fresh notice for recruitment have been published. He also brings 3 to the notice of the Court an order dated 14th July, 2016 passed in W.P. 11544(W) of 2016 (Mozammel Haque & Ors. vs. State of West Bengal & Ors.) wherein on the basis of the statement made by the government pleader it was recorded that the action in terms of the order of co-ordinate bench (i.e. order dated 30.11.2015) is underway. By the said order dated 14th July, 2016 the authorities were further directed to comply as early as possible but not later than a month from date with the order dated 30.11.2015.
There is no document as on record to show that the vacancy position as directed by the order dated 30.11.2015 has been revisited. There is also no document to show that the direction given in the order dated 14th July, 2016 has been complied with within a period of one month from the date of the said order. The scope of interfering with the selection process at the instance of a petitioner who has not participated in the said selection process is very limited. In the instant case the petitioner was empanelled and / or enlisted in terms of the result declared in the previous examination for the post of "Auxiliary Fire Operator" in the district of Nadia. This list was published sometimes around 13th July, 2012. With the passage of time if the petitioner due to over age become unable to have his name enlisted in a subsequent selection process and refusing him any order will amount to giving leverage to intransparent recruitment procedure particularly when there is a specific orders that are the orders dated 30.11.2015 and 14th July, 2016.
In the circumstances as aforesaid, the respondent authorities are directed to file an affidavit specifically mentioning therein how the vacancy position through out the State has been revisited in terms of the order dated 4 30.11.2015 and under what circumstances the respondent authorities published the notice for fresh recruitment to the post of "Auxiliary Fire Operator" from enlisted candidates from civil defence without first disposing of the case of the enlisted candidates as per the list published on 13th July 2012 in the light of the orders dated 30.11.2015 and 14.07.206.
It will be also unjust and improper to allow at this stage the process of recruitment for the post of "Auxiliary Fire Operator" in terms of the fresh notice. However, since the post signifies something related to public safety instead of staying the entire recruitment process of which I am otherwise inclined to do, I direct the State authorities to keep a post of "Auxiliary Fire Operator" in the district of Nadia to remain unfilled till the disposal of the writ petition. The State respondents are directed to file the affidavit within 15th January, 2019. Affidavit-in- Reply, if any, be filed within seven days thereafter.
List this matter before the appropriate bench any day after 24th January, 2019 subject to convenience.
(ARINDAM MUKHERJEE, J.)