Calcutta High Court (Appellete Side)
(Ad 2 & 3) vs The State Of West Bengal & Ors on 31 March, 2023
Court No. 17 WPA 15440 of 2021
31.03.2023 Kakali Kar Biswas
(AD 2 & 3) Vs.
The State of West Bengal & Ors.
(S. Banerjee)
with
WPA 1047 of 2020
Mr. K. M. Hossain
Mr. Ratan Das
... for the petitioner
Mr. Supriyo Chattopadhyay
Mr. Pinaki Dhole
Mr. Pinaki Bhattacharya
... for the State (in WPA 1047 of 2020)
Mr. B. P. Vaisya
Mr. Gourav Das
... for the DPSC, South 24 Parganas
In these two matters, being WPA 15440 of 2021
and WPA 1047 of 2020, three petitioners are before this
court. WPA 15440 of 2021 has been filed by one Kakali
Kar Biswas and WPA 15440 of 2021 has been filed by
one Rita (Jana) Manna and Biswajit Kayal.
Learned advocate for the petitioners (the same
advocate for all of them) has submitted that all of them
stand on the same footing.
From one reasoned order passed in compliance
with this court's order dated 15.12.2022, passed by the
Principal Secretary, School Education Department, the
following two paragraphs are required to be quoted:
2
"3) A hearing was fixed on 20.01.2023, where the
District Inspector of Schools (PE), South 24 Parganas as
the Secretary, DPSC, 24 Parganas (South) and the Ld.
Advocate of the Petitioner were present. However, owing
to the incomplete report of DPSC, 24 Parganas (South)
the hearing couldn't be completed. Accordingly, an
Interim Order vide Memo No. 145-SE(LAW) dated 27-01-
2023 was passed that stated "Accordingly, DPSC, (South
24 Parganas) shall re-submit report in appropriate
manner for enabling the undersigned to consider the
representation of the petitioner, in the light of the
judgment referred above." Further date of hearing was
fixed on 27.01.2023.
Subsequently, the Chairman, DPSC 24 Parganas
(South) submitted a clarificatory report vide Memo No.
365-L/DPSC/S 24Pgs dated 24-01-2023 stating the
followings:
"In continuation of my earlier reply dated
06.01.2023 vide Memo No. 23(L)/DPSC/S24Pgs.,
this is to inform you that as per office record the
cut-off marks for appearing in written test for
Unreserved category was 34.7389. But the
petitioner herein belonging to UR category
obtained 31.7778 marks which is below the
lowest cut off marks for being eligible in the
written test.
In compliance with the order of the
Hon'ble Supreme Court dated 24-01-2019
passed in the matter of Amina Khatun & Ors. Vs
Birbhum DPSC & Ors., after allowing weightage
of 22 marks for one year PTT the petitioner's
score became 46.1327, rounding off to 46.133
(400/900*65+1044/1600*22) which is more
than the cut off marks for appearing in the
written test which was held in the year 2009-
3
2010 in pursuance to what was begun in the
year 2006. The petitioner, owing to the score
after allowing weightage for PTT was eligible for
written test, if she was allowed to appear at that
point of time. However, whether the petitioner
may now be allowed to appear for the written
test may be considered.
Now your kind instruction is highly
solicited."
"8) Having considered the facts of the case, the
reports of the DPSC, 24 Parganas (South),
opinion as submitted by the Law Branch of the
School Education Department and in the light
of the order of the Hon'ble Apex Court dated 24-
01-2019 read with Hon'ble Apex Court order
dated 21-10-2019 and order of the Hon'ble High
Court, Calcutta passed in the instant writ
petition dated 15.12.2022 the undersigned has
come to the conclusion that the Petitioner
should be given an opportunity to participate in
the written test by the DPSC, 24 Parganas
(South). The Chairman, DPSC, 24 Parganas
(South) being the competent authority is
directed to revisit the recruitment process
pertaining to the petitioner as per extant
Recruitment Rules prevalent at that point of
time. The Chairman, DPSC, South 24 PGS is
hereby directed to allow the petitioner to appear
at the written test afresh and prepare as
modified score sheet for her only after putting
marks to be obtained by the petitioner in the
said written test. Thereafter the Chairman will
send the said recast panel to the Commissioner
of School Education, West Bengal for approval
4
as per law and take consequential steps, if any,
thereafter."
On perusal of the said reasoned order and after
considering the said reasoned order, I direct the
concerned DPSC to hold the written examination for
this three writ petitioners named above by two weeks
from date where these three petitioners will appear. The
result of the written test is to be declared by two weeks
thereafter. If the petitioners are qualified after the said
written examination, further steps are to be taken by
two weeks thereafter by the concerned DPSC to
recommend the petitioners in any school for their
appointment.
Learned advocate for the DPSC submits that
before such recommendation, approval of the
Commissioner of School Education would be required.
Therefore, I direct the Commissioner of School
Education, being the respondent no. 2 herein, to grant
approval to the appointment of the petitioners so that
they do not suffer further injustice due to delay in
getting the appointment.
With the above observations and directions, these
two writ petitions are allowed.
The reasoned order passed by the Principal
Secretary, School Education Department dated
21.02.2023 is kept on record.
This order has been passed in presence of the
learned lawyers of the parties. The concerned DPSC
shall act on the basis of the communication of their
learned advocate who has heard the order passed by
this court.
(Abhijit Gangopadhyay, J.)
