Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 10 of 96 (0.93 seconds)
The West Bengal Board Of Primary ... vs Priyanka Naskar And Ors on 3 December, 2025 cites

Monika Das & Ors vs The State Of West Bengal & Ors on 10 December, 2019

180. The first finding is contrary to the statement of the writ petitioners themselves that they were called for the interview, as recorded in paragraph 5 of the impugned judgment and in the second paragraph of the order dated 20.12.2022. The second finding has been arrived at being oblivious of the fact that the Board did produce the letters issued to different interviewers which were perused by the Court on 06.02.2023 and some interviewers were also examined by the Court. The third finding was arrived at on the basis of a perception that the marks in aptitude and the marks in academics should be proportional. Mere suspicion, howsoever high, cannot be a substitute of actual proof and writ Court ought not to interfere with the selection made by expert bodies upon assessing the comparative merits of 125 2025:CHC-AS:2189-DB the candidates. The investigation by CBI & ED could not have been the basis towards cancellation of the recruitment process moreso when in the writ petition no appointment of any candidate amongst the 32,000 appointees could be cited as an instance of biased or illegal selection and that as such the fourth finding is not sustainable. The material on record does not prove the chain of circumstances pointing out the guilt of the appellants beyond the shadow of reasonable doubt. Proof beyond reasonable doubt cannot be stretched morbidly to embrace every hunch and hesitancy. The fifth finding has been arrived at being oblivious of the fact that similar ground as urged in the earlier writ petitions had been turned down and no appeal had been preferred against the said judgments delivered in the cases of Monika Das (Supra) and Md. Rabiul Sk. (Supra). The sixth finding that no selection committee was constituted for the purpose of selection by the Board is not sustainable inasmuch as the Court itself found that interviewers were engaged and thirty interviewers were also summoned and questioned by the Court. Rule 4 of the RR, 2016 conferred authority towards engagement of any specialized agency. The Court made sweeping observations that the Board and its officials including its former President conducted the whole affair as that of a local club and jobs were actually sold to some candidates who had the money to purchase the employment, in the absence of appropriate pleadings. Even a point which is ostensibly a point of law is required to be substantiated by facts. The allegations of mala fides are more easily made than proved. The law casts a heavy burden on the persons alleging mala fides to prove the same on the basis of facts. Such proposition of law was, however, not considered which renders the finding to be 126 2025:CHC-AS:2189-DB unacceptable and beyond the pale. The seventh finding that in the recruitment scam stinking rats are being smelt is also not supported by the pleadings in the writ petition. There is no existence of any material to suggest that the candidates appointed were involved in any money trail. Such finding is thus the outcome of mere surmises and conjectures.
Calcutta High Court (Appellete Side) Cites 4 - Cited by 1 - A Banerjee - Full Document

Maria Margadia Sequeria Fernandes & Ors vs Erasmo Jack De Sequeria (D) Tr.Lrs.& Ors on 21 March, 2012

xiv) Maria Margarida Sequeira Fernandes and Others vs Erasmo Jack De Sequeira (Dead) Through Lrs, reported in (2012) 5 SCC 370 which laid down a proposition of law that a Judge in the Indian system has to be regarded as failing to exercise its jurisdiction, if in the guise of remaining neutral, he opts to remain passive to the proceedings before him. The said judgment is clearly distinguishable since in the present case, some teachers 137 2025:CHC-AS:2189-DB not even parties to the proceeding were called by the Court itself to adduce evidence;
Supreme Court of India Cites 14 - Cited by 1056 - Full Document

Manohar Narayan Joshi And Ors. vs State Of Maharashtra And Ors. on 23 August, 1979

In support of the arguments advanced reliance has been placed upon the judgments delivered in the cases of Manohar Joshi vs State of Maharashtra and Others, reported in (2012) 3 SCC 619, Magraj Patadia vs RK Birla and Others, reported in (1970) SCC 888, Maria Margarida Sequeira Fernandes and Others vs Erasmo Jack De Sequeira (Dead) Through Lrs, reported in (2012) 5 SCC 370, State of Tamil Nadu and Another vs A. Kalaimani and Others, reported in (2012) 16 SCC 217, H.R. Adyanthaya, reported in (1994) 4 SCC 164, Baishakhi Bhattacharya 101 2025:CHC-AS:2189-DB (Chatterjee) and Others vs State of West Bengal Others, reported in 2025 SCC Online SC 719, State of Odisha and Others vs Sulekh Chandra Pradhan and Others, reported in (2022) 7 SCC 482, Azmal Hoque vs State of West Bengal and Others (MAT 1309 of 2029) and in the case of State of Gujrat and Another vs Justice R. A. Mehta (Retired) and Others., reported in (2013) 3 SCC 1.
Bombay High Court Cites 14 - Cited by 36 - Full Document
1   2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next