Back
IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA
Subrata Talukdar, Krishna Rao, JJ.
Jhumjhum Halder & Ors. - Appellants
Versus
State Of West Bengal & Ors. - Respondents
WPA No. 18325 of 2012, 29606, 29607, 31563 of 2014, 1393, 5244, 19621, 20479, 20685, 22532 of 2019, 9717, 9869 of 2020, 2159 of 2021, 3985, 3987 of 2022, IA No. CAN 1 of 2014, 2 of 2015, (Old No. CAN 11636 of 2014, 2842, 9016, 9701, 9953, 9954, 9809, 11724 of 2015, 2249, 3470, 5827, 10417, 10911 of 2016, 1412, 2112, 6271 of 2017)
Decided On : 10-11-2022
Writ Petitions - Recruitment Process - Right to Free and Compulsory Education Act, 2009 - NCTE Regulations - Cancellation of Selection Process - Panel Declaration - Appointment - Government Order - Judicial Review
Fact of the Case:
The case involved multiple writ petitions challenging the cancellation of the recruitment process for Primary School Teachers initiated in 2009 and subsequent re-examinations and panel declarations. The petitioners sought orders for publication of the result, disclosure of the selected candidates, and appointment in order of merit maintaining reservation quota after approval from the Competent Authority. The Government had issued an order on 21.06.2012 cancelling the selection process and permitting re-start of the process by holding written examinations for eligible candidates who had participated in the earlier examination. The petitioners challenged this order and sought a fresh advertisement in accordance with the Right to Free and Compulsory Education Act, 2009.
Finding of the Court:
The Court found that the recruitment process was initiated in 2009 under the Recruitment Rule 2001, and the cancellation only pertained to the written examination, not the entire process. The Court upheld the Government Order and directed the authorities to take steps for declaration of panels and appointments within two weeks.
Issues: The issues included the validity of the Government Order cancelling the selection process, the eligibility of candidates under NCTE Regulations, and the challenge to the recruitment notice published in 2009. The Court also addressed the participation of petitioners in the recruitment process without objection and their subsequent challenge to the process.
Ratio Decidendi: The Court held that the cancellation of the written examination did not invalidate the entire recruitment process initiated in 2009. It also emphasized that candidates who consciously participated in the selection process could not later challenge the process. The Court directed the authorities to declare panels and make appointments based on merit within two weeks.
Final Decision: The Court dismissed some writ petitions and allowed others, directing the authorities to declare panels and make appointments within two weeks. The parties were entitled to act on the basis of a server copy of the Judgment and Order placed on the official website of the Court.
JUDGMENT
Krishna Rao, J. - In WPA 19621 (W) of 2019 (Arindam Mandal and 639 Ors. -vs- State of West Bengal & Ors.), WPA No. 20479 (W) of 2019 (Samir Purkait & 150 Ors. -vs-State of West Bengal & Ors.), WPA 20685 (W) of 2019 (Tarun Kumar Das & 19 Ors. -vs- State of West Bengal & Ors.), WPA 22532 (W) of 2019 (Aparna Purkait -vs- State of West Bengal & Ors.), WPA 9717 of 2020 (Krishnendu Gharami & 4 Ors. -vs- State of West Bengal & Ors.),WPA 3985 of 2022 (Jagannath Mistry & 54 Ors. -vs- State of West Bengal & Ors.), WPA No. 5244 of 2019, WPA No. 9869 of 2020 and in WPA No. 2159 of 2021 the petitioners have prayed for an order for publication of the result of 2009 selection process wherein written test was completed followed by an interview and to disclose the panel of selected candidates against the notified vacancies and to issue an order of appointment in order of merit maintaining reservation quota after approval from the Competent Authority.
2. In WPA 29606 (W) of 2014 (Jhumjhum Halder & 2 Ors. -versus- State of West Bengal & Ors.), WPA 29607 (W) of 2014 (Jahar Mallick & 51 Ors. -vs-State of West Bengal & Ors.), and in WPA No. 31563 of 2014 (Himansu Mondal -vs- State of West Bengal & Others ) the petitioners have prayed for declaration that the petitioners have the requisite qualification in terms of Right to Free and Compulsory Education Act, 2009 and NCTE for appointment as Primary School Teacher, further declaration not to appoint any candidate who does not possess the minimum qualification as laid down by NCTE after March, 2014 and also prayed to consider the training qualification of the petitioners and to award marks in respect thereof in accordance with the West Bengal Primary School Teacher Recruitment Rule, 2001 as amended up to date.
3. In WPA No. 18325 of 2012 the petitioners have prayed for rescind and cancellation of the order dt. 21st June 2012 issued by the Government of West Bengal and prayed for completion of selection process as per the written test and interview completed in the year 2009.
4. Initially before filing of the aforementioned writ petitions, one Shri Partha Nandy and several Ors. have preferred a writ application being WP No. 27619 (W) of 2014 challenging the Government Order dt. 21.06.2012. In the said writ petition, an interim order was passed. The said interim order was carried in appeal by the DPSC, Howrah, which was registered as AST No. 419 of 2014. By an Order dt. 02.12.2014, the Hon'ble Division Bench had set aside the interim order and granted liberty to the DPSC, Howrah to proceed with the recruitment of Assistant Teachers in the Primary Schools within its jurisdiction. The Hon'ble Division Bench had passed the following order on 02.12.2014 :-
'Since none of the present writ petitioners were party to the earlier writ proceedings and/or in the appeal arising therefrom, and further since the issues which are sought to be raised in this present writ petition were neither raised in the earlier writ petition and/or in the appeal arising therefrom nor those issues were finally decided in the appeal being FMA No. 3116 of 2013, the maintainability of the present writ petition, in our considered view, cannot be questioned on the ground of bar of res judicata. As such, we cannot hold that the Learned Trial Judge acted illegally in entertaining the said writ petition, but at the same time we cannot be oblivious of the facts that such Government Order dated June 21, 2012 which is now under challenge in the present writ petition was approved by the Division Bench of this Hon'ble Court while disposing of the appeal being FMA No. 3116 of 2013.'
'......may be that the Government order dated 21 June 2012 was challenged from a different angle but still then when the Division Bench approved the said Government Order, resulting in its merger with the order of the Division Bench, we feel that under such circ
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 cour....
Candidates participating in a selection process cannot challenge the process or regulations post-selection, establishing a principle of acquiescence in recruitment law.
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
