High Court At Calcutta & Ors vs Suchhanda Ganguly & Ors
2023 Latest Caselaw 2545 Cal/2

OD-4

               IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA
                CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
                        ORIGINAL SIDE

                       APOT/267/2023
                      IA NO: GA/1/2023
        THE LD. REGISTRAR GENERAL, APPELLATE SIDE,
              HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA & ORS.
                              VS
                SUCHHANDA GANGULY & ORS.


BEFORE :
THE HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE T.S. SIVAGNANAM
             And
THE HON'BLE JUSTICE HIRANMAY BHATTACHARYYA
Date : 6th September, 2023


                                                      Appearance :
                                           Mr. Joydip Kar, Sr. Adv.
                                     Mr. Siddhartha Banerjee, Adv.
                                              Mr. S.N. Ghosh, Adv.
                                                 Mr. J. Rauth, Adv.
                                             Mr. S. Majumder, Adv.
                                                     ...for appellant

                       Mr. Partha Sarathi Bhattachyaryya, Sr. Adv.
                                        Mr. Anand Farmania, Adv.
                                          Mr. Rahul Banerjee, Adv.
                                     Mr. Raju Bhattacharyya, Adv.
                                                 Mr. P.K. Maity, Adv.
                                 ... for writ petitioners/respondents

Mr. Biswabrata Basu Mallick, Adv.

Mr. Abhishek Banerjee, Adv.

...for State respondents

The Court : - We have elaborately heard the learned senior

Advocate appearing for the appellant as well as the learned Advocate

appearing for the respondent/writ petitioner.

It is submitted by the learned Advocate for the respondent/writ

petitioner that the writ petitioners are also in the process of filing an

appeal against the order passed by the Learned Single Bench as against

certain observations and findings which, according to them, are against

the interests of the writ petitioners and does not reflect the correct

factual/legal position.

The writ petitioners are granted leave to file their appeal and such

appeal shall be filed at the earliest.

Learned senior Advocate for the appellant pointed out that in

paragraph 35 of the impugned order all the findings rendered by the

Learned Single Bench would enure in favour of the appellant

Administration and the direction issued in paragraph 36 appears to be

contrary to the finding that was in paragraph 35 of the judgment.

Furthermore, it is submitted that the recruitment process has

commenced. The writ petitioners also participated in the process; written

examination was completed. The Learned Single Bench also permitted

the viva voce to be held but not to publish the result. The learned senior

Advocate would submit that though such was the order passed by the

Learned Single Bench, till date results were not being published and the

viva voce has not being conducted.

In our considered view, at this juncture, question of restricting the

appellant from publishing the result of the written examination will be

counter-productive, more particularly, when the writ petition was filed

after the notification of the recruitment process. In the earlier paragraph

we have recorded that the result of the written examination is yet to be

published. It is clarified by the learned senior Advocate for the appellant

that the results will be published only after the viva voce is conducted.

This fact is taken on record.

Since the substantial findings rendered by the Learned Single

Bench are not in favour of the writ petitioners, the writ petitioners want

to essentially agitate the correctness of those findings in a separate

appeal, which they propose to file. However, we are conscious of the fact

that the rights of the writ petitioners in the interregnum needs to be

protected since it is the submission of the learned senior Advocate for the

writ petitioners that their appeal which is in the process of being filed

itself will lose its efficacy. The writ petitioners need not have such

apprehension as we are inclined to pass this interim order slightly

modifying the direction passed by the Learned Single Bench making it

clear that whatever is being done in the recruitment process shall be

subject to the outcome of this appeal namely, APOT 267 of 2023, as well

as the appeal which is in the process of being filed by the

respondents/writ petitioners.

The appellant shall inform all the candidates that the recruitment

process shall proceed subject to the outcome of both the appeals and

this should be intimated to all the candidates in writing and their

acknowledgement should be obtained.

In the light of the above order and direction issued by the Learned

Single Bench is modified by permitting the appellant to proceed with the

recruitment process and call the candidates for the viva voce test and

thereafter publish the results and the result shall be placed before this

Court when the appeal is to heard out on the next date and thereafter,

the Court will consider as to whether the appellant should be permitted

to proceed further in the matter pursuant to the declaration of the

results.

List the matter on 20th September, 2023.

(T.S. SIVAGNANAM) CHIEF JUSTICE

(HIRANMAY BHATTACHARYYA, J.)

SN/SD AR(CR)