Back
2019 Supreme(Cal) 664
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT CALCUTTA
Protik Prakash Banerjee, J.
Md. Manzer Aqeel & Others – Petitioners
Versus
State of West Bengal & Others – Respondents
Writ Petition No. 8218 of 2017
Decided On : 05-03-2019
R.S. Chattopadhyay, U.S. Chattopadhyay, Santanu Maji, Pronoy Basak, Subir Sanyal, Ratul Biswas, Bhaskar Prasad Vaisya, Gourav Das, Biswabrata Basu Mallick, Advocates.
The absence of a provision for publication of the panel as mandated by the statutory rules meant that the prayer for publication of the full panel or any panel was misconceived and deserved to be rejected.
Headnote:
Publication of Panel - Recruitment Process - West Bengal Primary School Teachers Recruitment Rules, 2016 - Rule 2(l), Rule 8, Rule 9, Rule 10 - The court held that the absence of a provision for publication of the panel as mandated by the statutory rules meant that the prayer for publication of the full panel or any panel was misconceived and deserved to be rejected.
Fact of the Case:
The petitioners, Urdu medium-educated candidates, sought mandamus to publish the full panel of the recruitment process and an independent investigation into the recruitment process for primary teachers in West Bengal. They alleged malpractice and discrimination in the recruitment process.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the petitioners' claim for publication of the full panel was misconceived as the statutory rules did not mandate its publication. The court also dismissed the petitioners' allegations of malpractice and discrimination, stating that these were not properly pleaded and therefore could not be considered.
Issues: The issues revolved around the publication of the recruitment panel, alleged malpractice, and discrimination in the recruitment process.
Ratio Decidendi: The court held that the absence of a provision for publication of the panel as mandated by the statutory rules meant that the prayer for publication of the full panel or any panel was misconceived and deserved to be rejected. The court also emphasized that parties should be confined to the pleadings and not allowed to depart from them without proper supplementation.
Final Decision: The writ petition was dismissed on all grounds, and the court refrained from imposing costs on the petitioners.
JUDGMENT :
1. Affidavit-In-Opposition, Reply and written notes of argument are taken on record.
2. After mature consideration, on instructions, learned advocate for the petitioners abandons prayer (b) of the writ petition. Accordingly, no certiorari is issued so far as the records of the recruitment process are concerned.
3. This writ petition has been instituted principally for the following reliefs:
"(a) Issue a writ of or in the nature of mandamus directing the respondent authorities directing the respondent authorities to immediately publish the full panel of the recruitment process arising out of notification dated 26.09.2016 bearing memo no.2202/BPE/2016;
(b) A writ in the nature of mandamus directing an independent investigating committee comprising of legal and academic luminaries to enquire and investigate into the recruitment process arising out of Notification dated 26.09.2016 bearing memo no.2202/BPE/2016;"
4. At the outset, Mr. Sanyal, learned advocate appearing for the Board, Mr. Vaisya, learned Additional Government Pleader appearing for the State leading Mr. Das and Mr. Basu Mallick, appearing for the District Primary School Council, Uttar Dinajpur took the point that once the writ petitioners asked for publication of the full panel of the recruitment process arising out of the notification dated 26/09/2016 in prayer (b) it was no longer open to them to ask for investigation of the recruitment process and in effect challenge the notification.
5. I have found some force in such submission and thus, recorded while commencing hearing today that the petitioners on mature consideration have instructed their learned advocate to abandon prayer (b). The writ petition, therefore, survives only for prayer (a).
6. It is trite that a writ petition must be heard and decided on the pleadings contained in it and for this purpose any evidence that the petitioner wishes to produce must be disclosed as enclosures/annexures to the writ petition. Considering the writ petition strictly on the above basis, I find that the writ petitioners have made out a specific case as follows:
"4. Your petitioners state that all petitioners' mother tongue is Urdu and the petitioners studied in Urdu medium. They possess all the necessary educational qualifications which are required for appointment as primary teachers in the state of West Bengal.
5. Your petitioners state that they have duly qualified the Teachers Eligibility Test (TET) in the year 2014 and subsequently the petitioners have become qualified to become primary teachers in the state of West Bengal. Thereafter the petitioners applied for appointment for the post of primary teachers and each of the petitioners deposited Rs.200 to the office of the West Bengal Board of Primary Education. All the petitioners appeared before the interview board on 27.10.2016 at the Karnajora High School Uttar Dinajpur.
Photostat copies of the TET results of the petitioners are annexed herewith and marked with letter "P1"collectively.
6. Your petitioners state that the petitioners belong to the OBC-A category, they have come from Muslim community.
Photostat copies of the certificates indicating reserved status of the petitioners are annexed herewith and marked with letter "P-2"collectively.
7. Your petitioners state that on 26.09.2016, a notification was issued by the West Bengal Board of Primary Education, bearing Memo No.2202/BPE/2016, titled, "Appointment Notification for Primary Teachers". In the said notification, vacancies for various districts of West Bengal were listed along with the marking system of the candidates by the Selection Committee. It was also stated in the notification, inter alia, that candidates belonging to reserved categories, i.e. SC/ST/OBC-A/OBCB/PH/EC/Ex-Servicemen shall be allowed relaxation up to 5% in the qualifying marks. Photostat copy of the said notification dated 26.09.2016 issued
