Allowed

sondipan adhikary v. State of West Bengal

Calcutta HC11 Dec 2020WPA/8098/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This writ petition sought employment under the exempted category. The court directed the Joint Director of Employment to enroll the petitioner in the category and proceed with his claim within four weeks, rejecting inactivity due to spelling variations supported by an affidavit.

What did the court decide?

Director of Employment to enroll petitioner in exempted category and proceed within four weeks.

sondipan adhikary Vs State of West Bengal — Service and Employment | Calcutta HC (2020)

¶1

11.12.2020 Ct. No. 24 Item No. 30 pk.

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA CONSTITUTIONAL WRIT JURISDICTION WPA No. 8098 of 2020

¶3

Sandipan Adhikary -vs-

¶4

The State of West Bengal & Ors.

¶5

Mr. Suprabhat Bhattacharyya for the petitioner

¶6

Mrs. Sucharita Roy for the State

¶7

The petitioner prays for employment under the exempted category. The case of the petitioner was considered pursuant to the direction passed in a writ petition filed by the petitioner being W.P. No. 20874 (W) of 2012.

¶8

By a communication dated 22^nd September 2014, the Additional Land Acquisition Officer, South-24 Parganas requested the Block Development Officer, Mathurapur-II to cause local enquiry and to submit a report.

¶9

The Special Land Acquisition Officer, South 24Parganas by a communication dated 30^th October 2015 written to the Joint Director of Employment mentioned that the name of Sandipan Adhikary son of Sri Adhir Kumar Adhikary as a beneficiary under the exempted category has already been recommended. After recommendation, Sri Adhir Kumar Adhikary prayed for correction of the spelling of his son’s name. The

¶10

¶11

Employment Director refused to take any further action in view of the defective spelling.

¶12

Few of the educational certificates of the petitioner mentioned his name as “Sondipan Adhikary” but the Voter’s identity card, Aadhaar card, B.A. mark sheet and M.A. Part-I mark sheet support the spelling as “Sandipan Adhikary”.

¶13

The petitioner has sworn an affidavit to the effect that “Sondipan Adhikary” and “Sandipan Adhikary” is the name of one, same identical person.

¶14

The Special Land Acquisition Officer requested the Joint Director of Employment to take necessary steps in the matter.

¶15

The petitioner alleges that since thereafter no steps have been taken by the authority to proceed with his claim for employment.

¶16

As it appears that the petitioner has already furnished an affidavit affirming that “Sondipan” and “Sandipan” is the name of the same, one identical person accordingly there ought not to have been any difficulty on the part of the Joint Director of Employment to proceed with the case of the petitioner.

¶17

In view of the above, the instant writ petition is disposed of by directing the Joint Director of Employment to take steps to enroll the name of the petitioner in the exempted category for employment and to proceed with the same in accordance with law within a

¶18

¶19

period of four weeks from the date of communication of a

¶20

copy of this order.

¶21

WPA No. 8098 of 2020 is disposed of.

¶22

Affidavit of service filed in court today be taken on record.

¶23

Urgent photostat certified copy of this order be supplied to the parties, if applied for, as early as possible.

sondipan adhikary v. State of West Bengal

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

sondipan adhikary v. State of West Bengal

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Case details

Similar cases

Gobinda Chakraborty Vs Calcutta Electric Supply Corporation Ltd. & Ors.

Barun Nayek Vs the State of West Bengal and Ors.

Sunita Dalui Vs State of West Bengal and Ors.

Md. Abdul Aouwalsk. & Ors. Vs State of West Bengal & Ors.

Abhisekh Rajbhar Vs Union of India

Tarun Kumar Mondal Vs High Court at Calcutta and Ors.