Prahlad Chandra Ray vs Satyajit Sarkar

Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation

2025 Supreme(Cal) 169

HARISH TANDON, PRASENJIT BISWAS
Prahlad Chandra Ray – Appellant
Versus
Satyajit Sarkar – Respondent

Advocates:
Advocate Appeared:
For the Appellants : Ekramul Bari, Sk. Imtiaj Uddin
For the Respondents: Sabir Ahmed, Tasmim Ahamed, Dhiman Banerjee, Quazi Ezaz Ahmed
For the State : Tapati Samanta

Table of Content
1. recruitment process initiated (Para 1)
2. writ petition filed (Para 2)
3. interim order implications (Para 3 , 4)
4. judicial precedents (Para 5 , 6)
5. court's ruling on participation (Para 7 , 8 , 9 , 10 , 11 , 12 , 13 , 14 , 15 , 16 , 17)
6. writ petition outcome (Para 18)
7. writ petition dismissed (Para 19 , 20)

JUDGMENT :

HARISH TANDON, J.

1. The recruitment process for filling up the Group-D post in the concerned school initiated in the year 2006-2007 is still travelling in the Court flagging an issue which is otherwise settled through a catena of judgments rendered by this Court as well as the Apex Court.

2. The private respondent approached the Court for writ of mandamus to be issued so that he can participate in the selection process initiated for filling up Group-D post in the concerned school as a non-sponsored candidate. The interim order was passed allowing the private respondent to participate in the interview with the rider that the panel so prepared shall not be considered and approved by the District Inspector of School as it is subject to the final result of the said writ petition. Undeniably the private respondent stood first in the panel having found m