The main legal point established in the judgment is the right of the petitioners to be considered for appointment, the obligation of the employer to publish the panels, and the impact of pending court proceedings on the life of the panels.

JUDGMENT

Tapabrata Chakraborty, J. - The dispute involved in the present writ petitions, pertains to appointment to the post of primary school teachers in the districts of North 24 Parganas and Malda. The petitioners in W.P. No. 15128 of 2017 (in short, WP-I) and W.P No. 1686 of 2017 (in short, WP-II), participated in the recruitment process of 2009 conducted by the North 24 Parganas, District Primary School Council (in short, DPSC) in terms of the West Bengal Primary School Teachers Recruitment Rules, 2001 (in short, the 2001 Rules). The petitioners in W.P. No. 21997 of 2017 (in short, WPIII) and W.P No. 21533 of 2017 (in short, WP-IV), participated in the same recruitment process conducted by the Malda, DPSC. As identical legal and factual issues are involved in all the writ petitions, the same are taken up for hearing together.

2. Shorn of unnecessary details the facts are that in the year 2009, a recruitment process was initiated for filling up the posts of teacher in primary schools under several DPSCs across the State guided by the 2001 Rules. The petitioners applied for participation and as they fulfilled the eligibility criteria under the 2001 Rules, they were allowed to appear in the written examinations. By a Government Order dated 21st June, 2012 (in short, the said GO), the said written examinations were cancelled and the respective Councils were directed to conduct the written examinations de novo indicating that "no other candidates except those who were allowed to appear in the earlier recruitment examination conducted for the same purpose will be allowed to appear in the de novo examination". The said GO was, however, challenged in several writ petitions. Against the interim orders passed in the same, appeals were preferred in which an order was passed on 18th September, 2013 granting liberty to the Councils to conduct the de novo examinations. It was also observed that the Councils shall also be entitled to prepare the panel but the panel shall not be given effect to during the pendency of the writ petitions without leave of Court. Pursuant to the said order, the de novo examinations were held and the petitioners duly participated in the same. They emerged to be successful and were also called for interview, in which they appeared. Subsequently, they came to learn that the panels prepared have been sent to the Directorate by the respective Councils for approval. Vide memoranda dated 11th June, 2015 and 17th June, 2015, the Deputy Director of School Education provisionally approved the panels prepared by Malda DPSC and North 24 Parganas, DPSC respectively for one year with an observation that such approval shall abide by the result of the matters referred to in the said memoranda. Even thereafter the authorities did not take any step towards appointment of the empanelled candidates. The representations submitted were also not attended to. Aggrieved thereby, the petitioners preferred the present writ petitions. The WP-I and WP-II were disposed of by a common order dated 19th July, 2017 observing that "the life of a panel does not commence until its publication" and that "provisional approval of the panel by the memo dated 17th June, 2015 would not mean that the life of the panel started on 17th June, 2015". Since it was reported to His Lordship that the writ petitions referred to in the panel approving order of the Deputy Director were dismissed and there was no order restraining effect being given to the panel, the North 24 Parganas DPSC and its Chairman were directed to take necessary steps for issuing appointment letters to the empanelled candidates, in accordance with law. The WP-III and WP-IV were also disposed of by a common order dated 7th September, 2017, the contents whereof bear close resemblance to the order dated 19th July, 2017. Aggrieved by the said orders, appeals were preferred by the State, its functionaries and the Malda, DPSC. The Appeal Court by a judgment dated 12th October, 2018 decided to r