Calcutta High Court (Appellete Side)
Milon Mondal (Chowdhury) vs The State Of West Bengal & Ors on 12 March, 2014
Author: Biswanath Somadder
Bench: Biswanath Somadder
1
08
12.03.2014
pg.
WP No. 5587 (W) of 2014
Milon Mondal (Chowdhury)
Vs.
The State of West Bengal & Ors.
Mr. Susanta Kumar Mukherjee
Ms. Sonali Bhar
... For the petitioner
Mr. Sadhan Kumar Halder
Mr. Tushar Sinha Mahapatra
... For the State
Having heard the learned advocates for the parties and
upon perusing the instant application, it appears that the
subject-matter of challenge in the present writ proceedings is an
order of the District Project Officer, Sarva Shiksha Mission,
Malda, dated 1st February, 2014.
Perusing the impugned order, it appears that it has been
rendered pursuant to an order of this Court dated 4th
September, 2013, passed in an earlier writ petition moved by the
petitioner, being WP No.11736 (W) of 2007. While rejecting the
prayer of the petitioner for being engaged as a para teacher, the
District Project Officer has relied on a Government Order dated
9th June, 2010, whereby the Government of West Bengal has
imposed complete ban on the recruitment of para teacher
throughout the State.
Although it is submitted by the learned advocate for the
petitioner that the Government Order was issued much after the
selection process was completed, there cannot be any manner of
2
doubt whatsoever that merely because a selection process is
completed, a legal right automatically accrues in favour of a
participant in such selection process, to get appointed. Such
selection process culminates in issuance of either a letter of
appointment or an offer letter for appointment to the successful
candidate. Before its issuance, however, no legal right accrues.
In this context, one may take notice of the observations of this
Court in Reboti Mal & Ors. Vs. The State of West Bengal & Ors.,
reported in 2012 Lab IC 2401.
In the facts of the instant case, no letter of appointment
or even an offer letter for appointment was issued in favour of
the petitioner by the concerned respondent authority. As such,
there cannot be any reason as to why this Court should interfere with the impugned decision of the District Project Officer, Sarva Shiksha Mission, Malda, dated 1st February, 2014. The writ petition is liable to be dismissed and is accordingly dismissed.
Dismissal of the instant writ petition shall, however, cause no prejudice to the rights of the petitioner in any manner should the selection process be revived by the concerned respondent authority at a subsequent stage.
Urgent photostat certified copy of this order, if applied for, be given to the learned advocates for the parties.
(Biswanath Somadder, J.)