Calcutta High Court (Appellete Side)
Sg vs State Of West Bengal & Ors on 14 January, 2021
Items MAT 51 of 2021
14-01-2021
With
6&7 CAN 1 of 2021
With
Ct. 12
CAN 2 of 2021
Moumita Dutta & Ors.
sg Versus
State of West Bengal & Ors.
And
MAT 52 of 2021
With
CAN 1 of 2021
With
CAN 2 of 2021
Susanta Singha Madak
Versus
State of West Bengal & Ors.
(Through Video Conference)
Mr. Saugata Mitra, Adv.
Ms. Ankita Dey, Adv.
Mr. Rameswar Sinha, Adv.
...for the appellants
Mr. L.K. Gupta, Sr. Adv.
Mr. Subir Sanyal, Adv.
Mr. Ratul Biswas, Adv.
...for the W.B. Board of Primary Education
In all these matters, the applicants have prayed for leave to
prefer appeals against the order passed by the learned Single Judge on
January 7, 2021 in a batch of writ petitions.
These applications for leave to prefer appeal are like putting the
cart before the horse. The applicants have filed these applications for
leave to prefer appeal on the ground that the learned Single Judge by
the order dated January 7, 2021 directed the Secretary, West Bengal
Board of Primary Education to allow the petitioners covered by the
said order to submit applications off-line pursuant to the notification
dated December 23, 2020 and such applications were directed to be
duly considered during the recruitment process provided the writ
petitioners submit their applications by January 8, 2021 though the
notification specifies that the applications should be submitted by
January 6, 2021.
The basis of the judgment impugned herein appears to be that
the said writ petitioners approached the learned Single Judge on or
before January 6, 2021, which was the cut off date in terms of the
notification dated December 23, 2020.
We are at a loss to understand how the prayer for leave to prefer
appeals could be entertained, when the learned Single Judge has
decided the matters in which the presence of the present applicants
were not necessary. The applicants were neither necessary nor proper
parties in several writ petitions in which order dated January 7, 2021
was passed.
It is argued on behalf of the applicants that they are similarly
placed as that of the writ petitioners, who have been benefited by the
order dated January 7, 2021. Nothing prevented the present applicants
to approach the learned Single Judge for similar reliefs if they feel that
they are similarly placed.
In view of the fact that the present applicants are neither
necessary nor proper parties in the writ proceedings disposed of by
order dated January 7, 2021 and in deciding those writ petitions their
presence were required or the order passed in the said writ proceedings
are likely to affect or has affected the present applicants in any way, we
are not inclined to grant leave to prefer appeals against the order dated
January 7, 2021 leaving it to the applicants to pursue their remedies in
accordance with law. More so, we are of the firm opinion that the
applicants are not "persons aggrieved" who can file these applications
for leave to prefer appeal.
We, however, make it clear that we have not gone into the
merits of the matter.
The applications for leave to appeal are, thus, dismissed.
In view of dismissal of the applications for leave to prefer
appeal, the memoranda of appeal and the connected applications for
stay are rejected.
There will be no order as to costs.
Let photostat plain copies of this order duly countersigned by
the Assistant Registrar (Court) be made available to the learned
advocates for the parties for taking steps in the matter.
(Saugata Bhattacharyya, J.) (Soumen Sen, J.)
