Calcutta High Court - Jalpaiguri
Mamoni Parvin vs The State Of West Bengal & Ors on 25 March, 2026
25.03.2026 In The High Court at Calcutta
Ct. No. 5 Circuit Bench at Jalpaiguri
Sl. No.41
as
W. P. A. 472 of 2026
Mamoni Parvin
-Vs-
The State of West Bengal & Ors.
Mr. Sudip Ghosh Chowdhury
Mr. Soumyajit Laskar
... ... for the petitioner
Mr. Sunit Kumar Roy
... for the SSC
Mr. Subir Kr. Saha, Ld. AGP,
Mr. Sumit Kumar.
... ... for the State
1. Affidavit-of-service filed in court today is taken on
record.
2. The petitioner has preferred the present writ petition
seeking quashing of the rejection order issued by the District
Inspector of Schools dated 27.11.2022 in respect of the
transfer application of the petitioner dated 15.11.2022 in the
Utsashree Portal.
3. Learned Advocate for the petitioner states that the
said application has been rejected only on the ground that the
Utsashree Portal is under temporary suspension. He states
that the order of the District Inspector of Schools is illegal
since the Division Bench of this Court in MAT 339 of 2024
(Apurba Biswas -Vs- The State of West Bengal &
Ors.) vide its order dated 12.03.2024 has held that
"procedural law cannot defeat substantive rights and it is
required to assist and aid the object of the statute. The same
cannot defeat the substantive rights conferred by statute. In
2
view thereof, we are of the opinion that on the ground that
the Utsashree Portal was under suspension, the learned
single Judge ought not to have rejected the appellant's writ
petition."
4. In view of the finding of the Hon'ble Division Bench,
learned Counsel for the petitioner states that the suspension
of Utsashree Portal does not entitle the District Inspector of
Schools to reject the application of the petitioner solely on
the ground that the Utsashree Portal is under temporary
suspension.
5. Applying the principle of the aforesaid judgment, the
order of the District Inspector of Schools is set aside. The
order dated 27.11.2022 is quashed.
6. The petitioner is directed to make a fresh
representation which shall be considered in accordance with
law.
7. With the aforesaid directions, the present writ petition
is disposed of.
8. Since no affidavits have been filed by the respondents,
the allegations made in the writ petition shall not be deemed to have been admitted.
9. Let urgent Photostat certified copy of this order, if applied for, be supplied to the parties on usual undertaking.
(Gaurang Kanth, J.)