Calcutta High Court (Appellete Side)
Shrabani Halder vs The State Of West Bengal & Ors on 23 December, 2010
Author: Biswanath Somadder
Bench: Biswanath Somadder
1
23.12.10
(PP)
W.P. No. 21148 (W) OF 2010
Shrabani Halder
Versus
The State of West Bengal & Ors.
Mr. Ekramul Bari,
Mrs. Tanuja Basak
...for the petitioner.
Mr. Tulsidas Maity,
Mr. P. K. Ghosh
...for the Council.
Mr. Tapabrata Chakraborty
....for the State.
By consent of the parties, let this matter be treated as on
day's list.
Affidavit of service filed in Court today be kept on record.
After considering the submissions made by the learned
advocate appearing on behalf of the petitioner and upon perusing
the instant application, it appears that the writ petitioner
participated in a recruitment process conducted by the Kolkata
Primary School Council as a sponsored candidate under the
exempted category. It is the admitted position that the name of the
writ petitioner was sponsored by the concerned employment
exchange. The grievance of the writ petitioner is that in spite of
participation in the recruitment process and being successful, the
Kolkata Primary School Council has kept her result withheld.
According to the learned advocate appearing on behalf of the
Kolkata Primary School Council, the reason why the writ
2
petitioner's name has been kept withheld, is due to the verification
process initiated by the Council on the basis of directions given by
the Director of School Education, West Bengal. The verification
process centers around the genuinity and veracity of the exemption
claimed by the petitioner on the strength of her name recorded as
such in the concerned employment exchange.
After considering the submissions made by the learned
advocates for the parties, this Court is of the view that when the
concerned employment exchange has registered the name of the
petitioner under the exempted category, it is the concerned
employment exchange alone which can doubt the eligibility of the
petitioner of being so empanelled; for it is the concerned
employment exchange which has empanelled the petitioner upon
scrutiny of her particulars and it is not within the competence of
the Council or for that matter any other authority of the State to
doubt such competence of the concerned employment exchange. In
this regard, the observations made by this Court in an earlier order
passed in W. P. 6339(W) of 2004 dated 21st April, 2004 may be
relied upon. The said judgment and order was rendered by this
Court in a case where the petitioners claiming to be land evictees
and registered as exempted category candidates by the concerned
employment exchange, were denied to be treated as such by the
concerned District Primary School Council. The contention of the
Council was negated by the Court with certain observations, as
rendered in the judgment and order dated 21st April, 2004.
Having regard to the aforementioned judgment and order,
this Court directs the Director of School Education, West Bengal, to
3
consider the case of the writ petitioner in the light of the
observations made by this Court therein and take consequential
steps in the matter in accordance with law, 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.
In the event, the Director of School Education, West Bengal,
grants approval in favour of the writ petitioner, the Chairman of
the concerned Council shall issue appointment letter in favour of
the petitioner within a week therefrom.
Since no affidavits have been called for, allegations made in
the writ petition are deemed to be not admitted by the respondents.
The writ petition stands disposed of accordingly.
(Biswanath Somadder, J.)