Calcutta High Court (Appellete Side)
Riya Das vs The State Of West Bengal & Ors on 22 November, 2018
Author: Arijit Banerjee
Bench: Arijit Banerjee
1
32
22.11.2018.
d.p.
A.S.T. 77 of 2018
Riya Das
-versus
The State of West Bengal & Ors.
Mr. Soumen Kumar Dutta,
Mr. Debanshu Ghorai,
Mr. Subhas Jana.
...For the Petitioner.
Mr. Joydip Kar, Sr. Adv.,
Mr. Siddhartha Banerjee.
...For the High Court
Administration.
The petitioner challenges a notification dated 28th September,
2018 which was posted on the Website of the Calcutta High Court
inviting Online applications in the prescribed format from eligible
Indian citizens possessing knowledge in the vernacular of the State
for the preparation of a panel for filling up the existing and
expected vacancies of 221 Group 'D' posts on the Original Side and
on the Appellate Side of the High Court. The grounds on which the
recruitment process/notification have been challenged may be
summarized as follows:-
i) Examination fee has been imposed on SC/ST
candidates in violation of Section 4(b) of the West
Bengal Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes
(Reservation of Vacancies in Services and Posts) Act,
1976.
ii) The educational qualification prescribed is irrational.
Graduate candidates are not eligible to apply.
2
iii) No marks have been indicated for the interview.
iv) The recruitment process has not been published in two
Newspapers of national importance one of which would
be in the vernacular of the State.
v) The operation of the RTI Act, 2005 has been suspended
during the process of recruitment.
vi) There are no High Court Rules for recruitment of
Group 'D' staff.
Mr. Kar, learned senior counsel for the High Court
Administration has produced the advertisement in several
Newspapers. Regarding the other points, Mr. Kar submits that he
has a complete answer. He has also shown me a copy of the Rules
for recruitment of the staff of the High Court.
Be that as it may, I am not inclined to stop the process of
recruitment as prayed for by the petitioner. It is in greater public
interest that the process is completed. The notification was
published on the Website on 28th September, 2018. The writ
petition was affirmed on 16th November, 2018. The petitioner
should have been more diligent if she really wanted to have an
interim order in her favour.
Since the points raised by learned counsel for the petitioner
are mostly legal in nature, I am of the opinion that this writ petition
can be disposed of without inviting affidavits. The High Court
administration is directed to produce the records of the case
including relevant rules.
List the matter as a "Specially Fixed Matter" marked 12.30
P.M. on 12th December, 2018.
All steps taken by the respondents in the meantime shall
abide by the result of the writ petition.
3At the instance of the High Court administration, the point of maintainability of the writ petition is left open to be decided at the final hearing of the writ petition.
( Arijit Banerjee, J.)