Calcutta High Court (Appellete Side)
Bibhash Karmakar vs Chairman on 19 March, 2012
Author: Ashim Kumar Banerjee
Bench: Ashim Kumar Banerjee
1
Form No. J(2)
IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA
(Civil Appellate Jurisdiction)
Present:
The Hon'ble Justice Ashim Kumar Banerjee
And
The Hon'ble Justice Shukla Kabir (Sinha)
FMA 1581 of 2011
Bibhash Karmakar
-Vs-
Chairman, Kolkata Primary
School Council & Ors.
For the Appellant : Mr. Bibhash Karmakar
(In person)
For the State : Mr. Tapas Kumar Kundu
For the Kolkata Primary
School Council : Mr. Tulsidas Maity
ar
Heard on : 19.03.2012
Judgment on : 19.03.2012
2
Ashim Kumar Banerjee, J.
The appellant is aggrieved by the order of the learned Single Judge dismissing his writ petition when he challenged the Authority of the Council in fixing different yardstick in different mediums.
Learned Single Judge observed that the writ petition was devoid of merits and was accordingly dismissed.
We have heard the appellant in person. He contends before us that he being interested in Bengali medium group, was prevented from participating in the selection process on the ground that he did not reach the benchmark fixed by the Council, whereas less meritorious candidates were allowed to participate in the selection process in other medium. The appellant contends that there cannot be double reservation and that too, on extraneous consideration. According to him, he belongs to Scheduled Caste category. His counter part in such category cannot have further reservation by relaxing the benchmark simply because he belongs to another medium.
In this regard, he refers to an unreported Division Bench judgment, dated July 25, 2011, of the Delhi High Court in the case of DSSSB & Anr. Vs. Mukesh Kumar & Ors. being WP(c) No. 610,1595 &1596/2011wherein for the post of Assistant Teacher in Primary School under Delhi Municipal Corporation advertisement was published by making necessary reservation. Such selection process was called in question. The Division Bench observed 3 that Scheduled Caste or Scheduled Tribe in one State could not get the benefit in another State.
Mr. Tulsidas Maity, learned counsel, appearing for the Kolkata Primary School Council, contends that the case made out by the appellant was under
total misconception. He refers to the advertisement wherein we find that in Bengali medium schools 1353 posts were to be filled up whereas in Hindi, Oriya and Urdu mediums 805, 51 and 495 posts were to be filled up. All the said categories did have the proportionate reservation on Caste basis. As per the requirement, candidates applying for a particular medium must be such medium as first language in their school leaving examination. Separate selection process was held in respect of each of the mediums. The Council called eligible candidates to sit for the written examination at the ratio of 1 :15 and thereafter for the interview called from the candidates successfully passed in the written test at the ratio of 1 : 5. While considering the academic record for calling candidates at the ratio of 1 : 15 for being eligible to sit for the written examination, the appellant could not come within the zone of consideration as the last candidate obtained 69.65% whereas the appellant got 60.10%. However, in other mediums lesser number of candidates applied for the said post and as such maintaining the said ratio, the candidates having inferior merit than the appellant got opportunity to sit for the written examination. This was an eventuality which was incidental and the Council did not have any hand in it.4
Learned counsel, appearing for the State, adopts the submissions made by Mr. Maity.
We have considered the rival contentions. We feel, Mr. Maity's argument sounds logic. We fully appreciate the agony of the appellant. He contends that he spent substantial part of his life outside the State. He did not get any special privilege therein, then it would be unfair on the part of the home State to extend special privilege to the persons coming from outside the State. In our view, his apprehension is misconceived. This is an eventuality which is beyond the control of the Council. Council did not intentionally oust the appellant from the purview of consideration. It is only because of more candidates applying for the Bengali medium than the other medium that eventually obstructed the appellant's entry to the zone of consideration. We are constrained to hold that the learned Judge rightly rejected his petitioin.
FMA 1581 of 2011 thus fails and is hereby dismissed. There would be no order as to costs.
Urgent photostat certified copy of this order, if applied for, be given to the parties on usual undertaking.
(Ashim Kumar Banerjee, J.) I agree, (Shukla Kabir (Sinha, J.) 5