Chinmoy Mahata & Ors vs The State Of West Bengal & Ors
2023 Latest Caselaw 4052 Cal

   15.
3.7.2023
   S.D.

                                  W.P.A. 12911 of 2023

                               Chinmoy Mahata & Ors.
                                          Vs.
                            The State of West Bengal & Ors.

                  Mr. Rajarshi Chatterjee
                  Mr. Gobinda Dey
                                             ..For the Petitioners
                  Mr. Debasish Ghosh
                  Mr. Debapriya Chatterjee
                                  ...For the Respondent No. 4

Affidavit of service filed in Court today is retained with

the records.

An undertaking is given on behalf of the learned

counsel for the petitioners to file deficit Court fees by

tomorrow, i.e. July 4, 2023.

The petitioners applied for engagement as Tax

Collectors pursuant to an advertisement dated February 27,

2023 issued by Pingboni Gram Panchayat, District - Paschim

Medinipur. The said advertisement was issued by the

Pradhan of the Gram Panchayat.

Mr. Chatterjee, learned counsel appearing on behalf of

the petitioner submits that as per the Notification dated May

27, 2005, the general criteria for engagement of a Tax Collector

(Collecting Sarkar) entailed the following:-

"General Criteria for engagement of a Collecting

Sarkar:-

1. Minimum Age: 25 years on date of engagement,

2. Educational Qualification,

Passed Madhyamik or equivalent from any

recognized Board, Council or University,

3. Residence; Local (within the Gram Panchayat)

4. Maximum/Upper age limit for engagement;

The Gram Panchayat should be satisfied with the mental and physical fitness of the Collecting Sarkar for engagement/renewal of contract."

The method of selection was on the basis of merit and

work experience.

Therefore, it is submitted that the incumbents could not

be called for interview for assessing the merit of the

candidates.

Learned counsel appears on behalf of the respondent

no. 4/the Pradhan, Pingboni Gram Panchayat and submits that

the Pradhan had the liberty to assess the eligibility of the

incumbents on the basis of merit as well as work experience.

Therefore, the Pradhan did not commit any infirmity by

calling the incumbents for interview.

Considering the rival submissions of the parties and the

materials placed on record, this Court is of the view that the

petitioners were called for interview on April 13, 2023. The

petitioners participated in the said interview. Thereafter, a

panel was prepared by five members of the Interview Board

on April 20, 2023.

When the petitioner nos. 1 and 4 found that the names

of the petitioners did not appear in the list of selected

candidates, the petitioners made a representation on May 8,

2023 alleging that the petitioners could not be interviewed and

the said interview has been held in derogation of the

Notification dated May 27, 2005.

This Court finds that in the advertisement dated

February 27, 2023 the fact that the candidates will be selected

by the process of interview was clearly notified. That the

candidates would be selected on the basis of their merit being

assessed by way of interview was clearly indicated in the said

advertisement. Knowing fully well the method of selection,

the petitioners participated in the said process. Therefore, the

petitioners cannot be allowed to approbate and reprobate

knowing fully well the process of selection and participating

in the same without any protest or demur till such time the

results were published. The petitioners are now refrained

from challenging the said process of selection. Beneficial

references may be made to the Apex Court's judgments

reported in (1995) 3 SCC 486 (Madan Lal & Ors. vs. State of J

&K & Ors.) and (2019) 10 SCC 34 (AIR Commodore Naveen

Jain vs. Union of India & Ors.).

Furthermore, this Court finds that the Notification

dated May 27, 2005 does not limit the power of the Pradhan to

decide the question of merit by looking into the general

criteria for engagement. The Pradhan has to assess the merit

and work experience by way of any form of assessment that

the Pradhan may think fit necessary for engagement of the

selected candidates. The Gram Panchayat has to be satisfied

with the mental and physical fitness for engagement/renewal

of the Sarkars. In order to assess the mental/physical fitness if

the Pradhan decides that an interview is required, this Court

finds no infirmity in the said decision making process.

In the light of the discussions above, this Court is of the

view that the petitioners have not been able to prove their

locus standi to maintain the writ petition.

Accordingly, W.P.A. 12911 of 2023 is dismissed.

Since no affidavits have been directed to be exchanged

in the present writ petition, all the allegations contained in the

petition are deemed not to have been admitted by the parties.

All parties shall act on the server copy of this order

duly downloaded from the official website of this Court.

Urgent photostat certified copy of this order, if applied

for, be given to the parties upon compliance of all the

formalities.

(Lapita Banerji, J.)