Calcutta High Court (Appellete Side)
Ashok Kumar Mahato & Ors vs State Of West Bengal & Ors on 19 June, 2013
Author: Biswanath Somadder
Bench: Biswanath Somadder
1
IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA
CONSTITUTIONAL WRIT JURISDICTION
APPELLATE SIDE
Present:
The Hon'ble Mr. Justice Biswanath Somadder
WP No. 23308 (W) of 2009
Ashok Kumar Mahato & Ors.
-Versus-
State of West Bengal & Ors.
For the petitioners: Mr. Gouri Sankar De
Mr. Rudranil De
For the State: Mr. Ram Mohan Pal
For the Council: Mr. Jayanta Mitra
Judgment on: 19th June, 2013.
Biswanath Somadder, J.
Having heard the learned advocates for the parties and upon perusing the instant application, it appears that out of six individual petitioners, a couple of them have already secured appointment and the result of the remaining petitioners have been kept withheld by the District Primary School Council, Purulia.
From the records, it appears that the petitioners had initially approached this Court on 23rd December, 2009, and obtained an interim order whereby the concerned respondent authorities were directed to allow them to participate in 2 the test, which was scheduled to be held sometime in December, 2009, provided, of course, they came within the zone of consideration. It was also made clear that those who would appear in the written test pursuant to the interim order, shall not claim any equity and their participation shall abide by the result of the writ petition.
The principal prayers in the writ petition read as follows:
"(a) A Writ in the nature of a Writ of Mandamus commanding the respondents, in particular the Respondent No. 4, to show cause as to why the purported attempt of the District Primary School Council, Purulia to take interview only from candidates sponsored by the Employment Exchange without making any wide publication in reputed dailies for the purpose of recruitment of primary teachers should not be declared as bad in law being violative of principles as enunciated by the Hon'ble Apex Court.
(b) A Writ in the nature of a Writ of Mandamus commanding the Respondents, in particular the Respondent No. 4, to allow the petitioners to sit for interview for the post of primary teachers on any other adjourned date subject to their eligibility criteria without considering the cut off year;"
It is quite clear from the above quoted prayers of the writ petition that the scope of the writ petition is confined only to the petitioners' right of participation in the interview process. Since they have already participated in the interview process in terms of an interim order of this Court, there is no scope for this Court to pass any further order in the instant matter, particularly, the prayer of the learned advocate for the petitioners for disclosure of the results of those petitioners, which have been kept withheld by the Council. 3
The writ petition is, therefore, disposed of only upon confirming the interim order which was passed in the matter, earlier.
Urgent photostat certified copy of this order, if applied for, be given to the learned advocates for the parties.
(Biswanath Somadder, J.) pg.