Ct. 8 vs The State Of West Bengal & Ors
2023 Latest Caselaw 6081 Cal

                                             MAT 1390 of 2023
Item-15.                                      CAN 1 of 2023
           12-09-2023

  sg                                       Koushik Goswami
             Ct. 8
                                                  Versus
                                     The State of West Bengal & Ors.


                            Mr. Subir Sanyal, Adv.
                            Mr. Sangik Roy Chowdhury, Adv.
                                                        ...for the petitioner
                            Mr. Kishore Dutta, Sr. Adv.
                            Mr. Subhrangsu Panda, Adv.
                                                        ...for W.B.C.S.C
                            Mr. Anil Kr. Gupta, Adv.
                                                        ...for the UGC
                            Mr. Biswabrata Basu Mallick, AGP.
                                                        ...for the State


                        1.

The appeal is arising out of a judgment dated 26 th June, 2023

in a writ petition in which the petitioner has challenged the

process of marking in serial no.2 of the score pattern for

Assistant Professor in General Degree Colleges.

2. The writ petitioner was an aspirant for the post of Assistant

Professor in Chemistry. The writ petitioner contended that he

should have been awarded marks for two years Post-Doctoral

fellowship at Kalyani University and, in addition to this, four

year teaching experience at Ramakrishna Mission

Vidyamandir at Belur.

3. The facts have been concurrently circumstanced in the order

impugned and accordingly, we are refrained from stating the

facts save and except all the certificates indicated above.

4. The short question arises in this appeal is whether

teaching/Post-Doctoral degree mentioned in category II shall

be disjunctive or conjunctive. The recruitment process

clearly stipulates that either the teaching or Post-Doctoral

degree shall be taken into consideration for the purpose of

evaluation of the candidature.

5. It is no doubt that if the petitioner possessed all the

qualifications and one of them would entitle him to a higher

marks, then the recruitment body would be required to

consider the higher marks in comparison to the lesser marks

and evaluate the candidature on that basis. In the instant case,

there are no such inflicted candidates in the selection

process.

6. We cannot accept the argument that the petitioner should be

awarded marks both for teaching and Post-Doctoral as it

does not appear to be an intention of the Recruitment Rules.

We should not enter into the wisdom of the Recruitment

Rules as it falls within the domain of the expert committee.

7. Under such circumstances, we do not find any reason to

interfere with the order passed by the learned Single Judge.

8. The appeal fails. The appeal and the application are

dismissed. However, there shall be no order as to costs.

(Siddhartha Roy Chowdhury, J.) (Soumen Sen, J.)