Calcutta High Court (Appellete Side)
Smt. Dipali Ghosh (Kanji) & Ors vs State Of West Bengal & Anr on 19 January, 2012
Author: Biswanath Somadder
Bench: Biswanath Somadder
1
24 WP No. 14311 (W) of 2011
19.01.2012
pg.
Smt. Dipali Ghosh (Kanji) & Ors.
Vs.
State of West Bengal & Anr.
Mr. Ram Chandra Guchhait
... For the petitioners
Ms. Manjuli Chaudhuri
... For the respondent no. 5
Mr. Sadhan Kumar Halder ... For the State Let the report in the form of an affidavit filed on behalf of the respondent no. 10 be kept on record. After considering the submissions made by the learned advocates for the parties and upon perusing the instant application as well as the report of the respondent no. 10, it appears that the writ petitioners, who are peoples' representatives, participated in the recruitment process for the post of Accredited Social Health Activist (ASHA) under Uluberia-I Development Block. Although the petitioners were placed at the top of the panel, their names were excluded subsequently upon preparation of a revised panel since on 28th October, 2010, a Government memo was issued by the Mission Director (NRHM) and Secretary whereby it was clarified that no peoples' 2 representative would be eligible to be engaged as ASHA. In the facts of the instant case, it is the admitted position that the petitioners are all peoples' representatives. However, it appears that the interview process for the post in question was completed before issuance of the Government memo dated 28th October, 2010. In the said Government memo it further appears that regarding the validity of the existing panel it was reiterated that the existing panel of ASHA candidates, as sent for approval, would remain valid till further instructions. Only in cases where there was no panel, fresh selection was to be done following the guidelines issued on 4th June, 2010.
It is apparent that the interview process for the post in question was over before issuance of the memo dated 28th October, 2010, and there existed a valid panel as of that date. Therefore, it is not understandable as to why a revised panel was required to be prepared much later, since the initial panel was never invalidated before issuance of the memo dated 28th October, 2010. In such circumstances, clarification no. 3, as provided 3 in the Government memo dated 28th October, 2010, would squarely apply in the facts of the instant case. The writ petition is, therefore, disposed of with a direction upon the respondent no. 3, being the Mission Director (NRHM) and Secretary, to take a decision in the matter of selection of candidates from the valid panel prepared in terms of an advertisement dated 31st August, 2010, for the post of ASHA for the Uluberia-I Development Block before issuance of the memo dated 28th October, 2010. Such decision shall be taken by the respondent no. 3 as expeditiously as possible, 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. Urgent photostat certified copy of this order, if applied for, be given to the learned advocates for the parties.
(Biswanath Somadder, J.)