Calcutta High Court (Appellete Side)
In Re: Pallab Kumar Deb vs The State Of West Bengal & Ors on 11 April, 2019
Author: Arindam Mukherjee
Bench: Arindam Mukherjee
1
11.04.19
Court No.09
Item No.12
Avijit Mitra
W. P. No. 32087 (W) of 2014
In re: Pallab Kumar Deb
-vs-
The State of West Bengal & Ors.
Mr. S.M. Ali,
Ms. Tanuja Basak,
Mr. T. Khan
For the petitioner
Mr. Kanak Kiran Bandopadhyay
For the Respondents Nos.2, 3 & 4
The writ petitioner appeared in the 12th Regional Level Selection Test (AT), 2011 conducted by the West Bengal Regional School Service Commission, Northern Region for filling in the post of Assistant Teachers in Bio-Science (Pass) Category. The name of the petitioner was not recommended. The petitioner made an application under the Right to Information Act, 2005 before the Commission asking for some information. By a memo dated 19th March, 2014, the Commission while supplying the information sought for, also provided the marks obtained by the petitioner and the marks of the last candidate empanelled in the waiting list for filling in the post of Assistant Teacher of Bio-Science (Pass) Category. From the information so supplied it is found that the last empanelled candidate in the waiting list (general) obtained 23.5 marks whereas the petitioner obtained 23 marks.
The petitioner alleges that the evaluation in respect of question nos. 5, 8 and 13 in Zoology and question nos.1, 7, 8 and 13 in Botany papers have not been properly evaluated. The petitioner seeks re-evaluation of the said two papers. It is submitted on behalf of the petitioner that the difference in marks of the last candidate 2 empanelled in the waiting list and that of the petitioner is 0.5. Had the petitioner been given proper marks on evaluation of the answers in respect of the questions mentioned hereinabove in Zoology and Botany papers respectively, the petitioner would have come within the zone of consideration for his name being empanelled at least in the waiting list.
The advocate appearing on behalf of the respondent nos. 2, 3 and 4 submits that the issue of re-evaluation and/or re-examination of the answer-scripts is no more open for challenge, in view of the judgement rendered by a Division Bench of this Court in Central School Service Commission & Ors. Vs. Tanuj Paul and several other appeals on similar point decided by the said common judgment dated 18th May, 2017. It is clear from the said judgment that in the absence of any rule under which the examination was conducted there is no scope of re-evaluation or re-examination of the answer- scripts.
In the instant case, the examination was conducted under the West Bengal School Service Commission (Selection of Persons for Appointment to the post of Teachers) Rules, 2007 which at the relevant time did not provide for any re-evaluation or re- examination of the answer-scripts. Relying upon the ratio laid down in the Tanuj Paul (supra), the writ petition according to the said respondents is required to be dismissed.
After considering the submissions made on behalf of the respective parties, the materials on record and the judgment cited on behalf of the respondent nos. 2, 3 and 4, I am of the view that the petitioner is not entitled to any of the reliefs claimed in 3 the writ petition. The issue involved in the writ petition is covered by the judgment, as referred hereinabove.
There is no scope of re-evaluation and/or re-examination of the answer-scripts of the petitioner for the subjects Zoology and Botany.
Accordingly, the writ petition is dismissed.
There shall however be no order as to costs.
Urgent photostat certified copy of this order, if applied for, be supplied to the parties, upon compliance of all requisite formalities.
(Arindam Mukherjee, J.)