A writ petition challenging the validity of a selection process for primary school teachers was dismissed as infructuous since the issues raised had already been decided in an earlier writ petition and the petitioners' claim of missing testimonials was beyond the limitation period.

The short facts of the case are as follows:-

1. In this writ petition the petitioners are unemployed. They all are Madhyamik pass and all of them were registered with the Employment Exchange.

2. The petitioners have a common cause of action in the present petition and if separate petitions had to be filed same question of law and fact would have arisen and the petitioners have joined in one petition to avoid multiplicity of proceedings. The testimonials of the petitioners i.e. Madhyamik pass certificate and Employment Exchange Card are annexed in the writ petition.

3. The petitioners have all participated in the selection process of 1993 initiated by Midnapur District Primary School Council as it was an undivided

4. District at that point of time. At that point of time Recruitment and Leave to Teachers in Primary School Rules of 1991 was in vogue. Total marks of selection for teachers was 100, out of which 65 academic, 20 training, 10 oral and 5 co-curricular activities. Some of the copies of the Admit Cards are annexed in the writ petition.

5. After the result was published there was massive irregularity which was apparent on the face of the record. A writ petition was filed by Susmita Bhowmick and others being W.P. No. 5137 (W) of 1996 challenging the said selection and finally the Hon’ble Justice Harish Tandon directed the Director of School Education to hold an enquiry as to the allegations made in the writ petition. The Director of School Education constituted one committee and the said committee held an enquiry upon inspection of records and submitted a report on 06.06.2012 before the Hon’ble High Court. Copy of the said report dated 06.06.2012 is annexed in the writ petition.

6. Requisition was initially sent on January 1987 to the Employment Exchange by the Primary School Council and a second requisition was sent on 07.08.1991. Total 40475 candidates recorded with the Employment Exchange till November 1992 were sponsored and in 1993 the panel was prepared and was approved by the D.S.E. All appointments made in 1993 was acknowledged by the Hon’ble Supreme Court on 05.12.1995 due to corruption in selection process and a fresh panel was directed to be prepared from amongst the candidates already sponsored.

7. Total evaluation was reduced to 50 marks from 100 marks, academic qualification 25, oral interview 15, general impression 10.

8. Out of total 40475 sponsored candidates records relating to the candidates from Sl No. 12182 to 14778; 17365 to 18258; 33216 to 35348 and 39357 to 40429, total 6697 persons testimonials and records were not made available to the Inspecting Team of the Director. The panel was prepared under Recruitment Rule 1940 and not under 1991 Rule. 50% vacancies were filled up by trained persons but the persons who were declared trained were not holding the training qualification of Junior Basic Training or Primary Teachers Training. A good number of empanelled candidates both in trained and untrained were in 3rd Division in Matriculation and High marks were awarded to them to give them berth in the panel of successful candidates overstepping the high marks holder in the Madhyamik examination.

9. The records of one appointee Kamalendu Maity having Sl No. 118 call Letter No. 34852 could not be presented by the School Council. A large number of candidates about 56 were shown to have been sponsored as SC category candidates but no SC Certificate could be produced in support of their status as SC. The writ petition being W.P. No. 5137(W) of 1996 was finally disposed of by the Hon’ble Justice Harish Tandon on 14.12.2012 when his Lordship was pleased to hold inter alia that the recruitment is ex facie illegal as the Recruitment Rule of 1991 was supposed to be followed not the 1940 Rule. The persons sponsored in General category were included in the panel of SC category.

10. The trained persons have not been chosen from the Junior Basic Training or Primary Teachers Training but B.Ed./B.T. candidates hav