Quashed
Priyabrata Roy and Anr. v. State of West Bengal and Ors.
Calcutta HCWPA/2290/2021
Case brief
from the order text
What is this about?
SL No. 2 Court No. 24 (P.M.) WPA 2290 of…
What the court decided
AI extract
SL No. 2 Court No. 24 (P.M.) WPA 2290 of…
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
05.08.2021 SL No. 2 Court No. 24 (P.M.)
WPA 2290 of 2021
Priyabrata Roy & Anr. Vs
The State of West Bengal & Ors. (Via Video Conference)
Mr. Anindya Bose, Mr. Anindya Sundar Das, Ms. Ananya Chakraborty … for the petitioners
Mr. Supriyo Chattopadhyay Ms. Tapati Samanta … for the State
The petitioners participated in the process of selection for being appointed in the post of Librarian in town/Sub-Divisional Library which was lying vacant in the district of Paschim Medinipur. The recruitment process was initiated in the year 2009. The interview of the candidates was made on 14th November, 15th November and 16th November, 2010.
The grievance of the petitioners is that till date the selection process has not reached its logical conclusion. The petitioners pray for a direction upon the respondent authorities for issuance of letter of appointment in their favour on the basis of the panel which was prepared.
The District Library Officer, Paschim Medinipur has filed a report wherefrom it appears that the score-sheet containing names of twenty seven candidates containing
2
marks on the basis of academic qualification and their interview was prepared. A panel of nine candidates was also prepared but neither the score-sheet nor the panel consist the signatures of any of the five members of the selection committee.
A letter was written by the District Library Officer addressed to the Director of Library Services mentioning that only one candidate for the general (exempted) category was interviewed and the question was whether the selection of such a single interviewed candidate was legally tenable or not. It does not appear from the report that the names of the petitioners were included in the panel.
As it appears that the panel, if any, prepared had not been signed by the members of the Selection Committee accordingly, the same cannot be acted upon at such a distant date.
As such the instant writ petition is disposed of by directing the Director of Library Services to take appropriate steps to fill up the vacancies, strictly in accordance with law. In the event, the petitioners are eligible for participating in the subsequent recruitment process which may be initiated for filling up the vacancy, the respondent authority shall permit the petitioner to participate in the said process.
The writ petition stands disposed of.
Urgent photostat certified copy of this order, if applied for, be given to the parties on completion of usual formalities.
3
( Amrita Sinha, J.)
Priyabrata Roy
The State of West Bengal
Amrita Sinha
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court