Kasem Seikh vs The State Of West Bengal & Ors
2022 Latest Caselaw 5909 Cal

                                       1


                    IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA

                    (Constitutional Writ Jurisdiction)

                            APPELLATE SIDE

Present:

The Hon'ble Justice Krishna Rao

                            WPA 2386 of 2003
                              Kasem Seikh
                                   Versus
                     The State of West Bengal & Ors.



            Mr. Mukunda Lal Sarkar
            Mr. Pratip Kumar Chatterjee
                                           .....For the Petitioner
            Ms. Kakali Samajpaty
                                           ......For the State




Heard on                : 16.08.2022

Judgment on             : 25.08.2022

Krishna Rao, J.:-    The petitioner has filed the instant writ application

praying for setting aside the panel prepared on the basis of interview dt.

24.01.2003 for the post of Class IV staff in Hizole High School, P.O-

Natungram, District- Murshidabad and also praying for a direction to

conduct fresh interview of the same candidates who appeared in the

interview dt. 24.01.2003.


      The petitioner is working in the said school as Class IV employee

voluntarily with effect from 01.03.1999-A permission was obtained for
                                        2


appointment of Class IV staff vide Memo No. 4054-G dt. 30.12.1988 but no

permanent staffs were recruited and again vide Memo No. 116/CC dt.

24.04.2001, the District Inspector of Schools (SE), Murshidabad had

accorded re-permission to fill up the said vacancy. As the petitioner is

working in the said school since the month of March, 1999 but her service

was not regularized and accordingly the petitioner has preferred a writ

application before this Court being WP No. 914 (w) of 2000 and accordingly

the Coordinate Bench of this Hon'ble Court has disposed of the said writ

application by directing the respondent to allow the petitioner to appear

before the Selection Committee for interview on 24.01.2003 for the purpose

of recruitment to the post of Class IV staff in the said school.

As per the direction passed by the Coordinate Bench of this Court, the

petitioner had participated in the selection process. The petitioner submits

that the petitioner came to know in the said interview process one of the

Selection Committee member i.e. the Government Nominee had allotted 14

marks to the petitioner out of 15 marks, Headmaster-cum-Secretary had

allotted 15 marks out of 15 marks, the President of the Managing

Committee had allotted only 1 mark out of 15 mark and the Panchayat

Samiti Representative had allotted only 2 marks out of 15 marks wherein

the President, Managing Committee and Panchayat Samiti Representative

have allotted 15 marks out of 15 marks to the respondent no. 8.

The petitioner submits that the President, Managing Committee and

Panchayat Samiti Representative have allotted less marks to the petitioner

arbitrarily only with the intention to debar the petitioner to get regular

appointment as Class IV employee in the said school. The petitioner submits

that the meeting of the Managing Committee was fixed on 28.01.2003 for

approval of the panel but the said meeting was postponed due to lack of

quorum and again on 05.02.2003, a meeting was called for to discuss an

approval of the previous meeting dt. 28.01.2003, final voter list of the

Managing Committee Election and Miscellaneous and there is no agenda for

approval of the panel.

The petitioner submits that the Managing Committee of the School

had acted arbitrarily only with the intention to debar the petitioner for

getting the job in the said school.

Counsel for the respondent submits that the writ petition filed by the

petitioner has became infractuous as the school authorities have not

submitted any panel list for approval to the concern authority. It is further

contended that if any panel list is prepared, the same is to be valid only for

one year and thus at this stage after the lapse of 19 years no order can be

passed in the instant application.

The petitioner has challenged the selection process of Class IV

employee, though the petitioner has made several allegations against the

member of the Selection Committee but the petitioner has not filed any

document to show that any panel list was prepared or any of the persons

have been appointed from the said panel list. The petitioner has

categorically mentioned about obtained mark in the interview process but

no document was placed on record to establish the contention raised by the

petitioner. It is not the case of the petitioner that the respondents have

appointed any persons who have obtained less mark than the petitioner. The

petitioner has challenged the selection process of 2003 but the petitioner

has not substantiated his contention by cogent evidence.

After going through the pleadings and the documents relied by the

petitioner this Court is of the view, the petitioner has filed the instant writ

application only making a bold allegations against the members of the

Selection Committee but has not produced any documents to substantiate

that the said persons were the member of the Selection Committee and have

allotted the marks as claimed by the petitioner.

In view of the above, this Court is of the view the writ petition is filed

by the petitioner is misconceived and accordingly WPA 2386 of 2003 is

dismissed.

Parties shall be entitled to act on the basis of a server copy of the

Judgment and Order placed on the official website of the Court.

Urgent Xerox certified photocopies of this judgment, if applied for, be

given to the parties upon compliance of the requisite formalities.

(Krishna Rao, J.)