2.2022 Nasim Akhter vs (Item No.2
2022 Latest Caselaw 497 Cal

Court No. 24        W.P.A. 8771 of 2020
11.02.2022

Nasim Akhter VS (Item No.20-

50) The State of West Bengal & Ors.

With (sh) W.P.A. 8790 of 2020 With W.P.A. 8797 of 2020 With W.P.A. 8802 of 2020 With W.P.A. 8805 of 2020 With W.P.A. 8808 of 2020 With W.P.A. 8851 of 2020 With W.P.A. 8857 of 2020 With W.P.A. 8863 of 2020 With W.P.A. 8874 of 2020 With W.P.A. 9575 of 2020 With W.P.A. 9044 of 2020 With W.P.A. 9046 of 2020 With W.P.A. 9048 of 2020 With W.P.A. 9051 of 2020 With W.P.A. 9108 of 2020 With W.P.A. 9114 of 2020 With W.P.A. 9120 of 2020 With W.P.A. 9163 of 2020 With W.P.A. 9168 of 2020 With W.P.A. 9454 of 2020 With W.P.A. 9464 of 2020 With W.P.A. 9466 of 2020 With W.P.A. 9571 of 2020 With W.P.A. 9684 of 2020 With W.P.A. 9685 of 2020 With

W.P.A. 9688 of 2020 With W.P.A. 9693 of 2020 With W.P.A. 9695 of 2020 With W.P.A. 9697 of 2020 With W.P.A. 9703 of 2020 (via video conference)

Mr. Samim Ahammed Mr. Arka Maity Ms. Saloni Bhattacharjee Ms. Gulsanwara Pervin ... For the petitioners.

Mr. Prosenjit Mukherjee Ms. Madhurima Sarka ... For the Madrasah Service Commission.

The reasoned order dated December 6, 2019

passed by the Chairman, West Bengal Madrasah

Service Commission in compliance of the direction

passed by this Court on August 30, 2019 in WP No.

24096(W) of 2018 and WP No. 11977(W) of 2018 is

impugned in the writ petitions.

The petitioners participated in the 6th SLST,

2013(AT) conducted by the West Bengal Madrasah

Service Commission. The said selection test got held

up midway as certain provisions of the West Bengal

Madrasah Service Commission Act, 2008 came to be

challenged and the same was declared ultra vires by

this Court. The matter thereafter went up before the

Hon'ble Supreme Court and the Hon'ble Supreme

Court was pleased to hold that the Act was intra

vires.

At the time of hearing the appeal, the Hon'ble

Supreme Court observed that there are large number

of vacancies existing in the various Madrasahs, and

accordingly passed order on May 17, 2018 permitting

declaration of the result for the recruitment process

of the year 2014. However, the Hon'ble Court

restrained the Commission to undertake further

recruitment process.

Pursuant to the leave granted by the Hon'ble

Supreme Court, the Madrasah Service Commission

published the result of the selection test.

The Madrasah Service Commission in the

affidavit-of-opposition has averred that the result was

published on June 22, 2018 in the notice board of

the Commission with a view to comply the solemn

order dated May 17, 2018.

The Madrasah Service Commission completed

the recommendation process by June 30, 2018. The

matter was fixed before the Hon'ble Supreme Court

on July 12, 2018. Due to urgency the Commission

could not publish the panel in the official website of

the Commission but the result/panel and the

vacancy was published in the official notice board of

the Commission and the result was uploaded in the

official website of the Commission in such a manner

that the candidates could see their results by feeding

their registration numbers.

The final vacancies were uploaded in the

official website of the Commission to enable the

empanelled candidates to select the Madrasahs of

their choice well before the counselling which was

conducted from June 26, 2018 to June 30, 2018.

The panel in question was prepared strictly on

the basis of merit according to the marks obtained by

the candidates in the written examination, academic

score and the marks obtained in the personality test.

The grievance of the petitioners is that the

panel which was allegedly published was not in

accordance with Table-3 of the West Bengal

Madrasah Service Commission Recruitment

(Selection and Recommendation of Persons for

Appointment and Transfer to the Posts of Teacher

and Non-teaching Staff), Rules 2010.

It has been submitted that the break up of

marks has not been disclosed. The evaluation

process, which the Commission has relied upon, was

not in accordance with the recruitment Rules. Still

now there are huge number of vacancies to be filled

up and the petitioners being TET qualified candidates

ought to be favoured with appointment.

The Commission has opposed the prayer of the

petitioners. It has been submitted that the panel in

question was published in the year 2018 and the

same was valid for a period of one year only. The

evaluation of marks has been done by following the

Rules of the West Bengal School Service Commission

Rules. The fact of following the Rules of the West

Bengal School Service Commission Rules in respect

of the 6th SLST, 2013 was published in the official

website of the West Bengal Madrasah Service

Commission.

It has been submitted that a co-ordinate Bench

of this Court by a judgment dated August 18, 2021

passed in WPA 12901 of 2021 (Mst. Reshma Khatun

& Ors. v. State of West Bengal & Ors.) was pleased to

hold that there is no illegality in culling out of a table

from a different but an equivalent Rule for

recruitment of school teachers by the Madrasah

Service Commission. All the candidates for the posts

of Madrasah teachers can be assessed by using the

said tool. The Court was pleased not to accept the

submission of the petitioner regarding publishing the

break up of the marks and the list of candidates

following the School Service Commission Rules,

2016.

The learned advocate appearing for the

Commission has produced before this Court the

break up of the marks obtained by the petitioners

herein.

From the said break up it appears that in the

subject Arts and Social Science the lowest mark

obtained is 70.26 in Bengali medium (General) and

69.55 in Bengali medium (Female) category.

The lowest mark obtained in the subject

Physics is 49.4 in Bengali medium (General) and 44.4

in Bengali medium (Female) category.

The lowest mark obtained in the subject

English (H/PG) is 53.33 in Bengali medium (General)

and 52 in Bengali medium (Female) category.

The lowest mark obtained in the subject

Bengali (H/PG) is 66.85 in Bengali medium (General)

and 64.77 in Bengali medium (Female) category.

The lowest mark obtained in the subject

Mathematics (H/PG) is 46.87 in Bengali medium

(General) and 41.97 in Bengali medium (Female)

category.

The lowest mark obtained in the subject Arabic

MM (H/PG) is 49.75 in Bengali medium (General)

category.

The lowest mark obtained in the subject

Geography (H/PG) is 63.63 in Bengali medium

(General) and 62 in Bengali medium (Female)

category.

The lowest mark obtained in the subject

History (H/PG) is 66.31 in Bengali medium (General)

category.

None of the petitioners could be awarded any

marks for experience, as they do not possess any

experience of teaching. All the petitioners obtained

less marks than the last empanelled candidate in

their respective category.

From the submissions made on behalf of both

the parties, it appears that the petitioners being

unsuccessful in the selection process have come up

with frivolous allegations challenging the reasoned

order passed by the Commission. They challenge the

marking pattern and the manner in which the

result/panel has been published. The petitioners lost

sight of the fact that they are not the only ones to

have been singled out. The marking pattern was

applied uniformly in respect of all the candidates.

The petitioners have not been treated differently and

have not been prejudiced in any manner whatsoever.

It does not appear that the stand of the

Commission was in any manner illegal, arbitrary,

discriminatory or contrary to the provisions of the

Recruitment Rules, 2010.

The entire issue of publishing the panel already

attained finality way back in 2018 when the matter

was sub judice before the Hon'ble Supreme Court.

The same ought not to be reopened at such a belated

stage, that too, at the instance of unsuccessful

candidates. The rights of the successful candidates

have already been crystalized in the meantime and

should not be ordinarily disturbed unless there has

been gross violation of statutory rules or mala fide in

the selection process.

The writ petitions fail and are hereby

dismissed.

Urgent photostat certified copy of this order, if

applied for, be given to the parties after completion of

all legal formalities.

( Amrita Sinha, J)