High Court of Judicature at Calcutta
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE GANGULY, THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ALOKE CHAKRABARTI, THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DILIP KUMAR SETH, THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRABIR KUMAR SAMANTA & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.K. GUPTA
Rabindra Nath Mahata
Versus
State of West Bengal and others
AST No. 135 of 2005 and W.P. No. 8027 (W) of 2005
Decided on : 07-07-2005
Mandamus - Recruitment Process - West Bengal Board of Secondary Education Act, 1963 - 1959 Employment Exchanges Act - The court considered the conflict between the decision of the Supreme Court in Abu Taker v. Abdul Wahab & Ors. and the Special Bench decision in Debasis Dutta v. State of West Bengal, 1998 (2) CLJ 1. The court held that the Supreme Court's decision in Abu Taker impliedly overruled the Special Bench decision, allowing candidates not sponsored by the Employment Exchange to participate in the selection process for non-teaching staff in schools governed by the 1969 Management Rules.
Fact of the Case:
The petitioner sought a mandamus to participate in a school's selection process for Clerk-cum-Typist. The court considered conflicting decisions and referred the matter to a larger Bench to resolve the question of whether candidates not sponsored by the Employment Exchange have the right to participate in the selection process.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the Supreme Court's decision in Abu Taker impliedly overruled the Special Bench decision in Debasis Dutta, allowing candidates not sponsored by the Employment Exchange to participate in the selection process.
Issues: The conflicting decisions between the Supreme Court's decision in Abu Taker and the Special Bench decision in Debasis Dutta regarding the right of candidates not sponsored by the Employment Exchange to participate in the selection process.
Ratio Decidendi: The Supreme Court's decision in Abu Taker impliedly overruled the Special Bench decision in Debasis Dutta, allowing candidates not sponsored by the Employment Exchange to participate in the selection process for non-teaching staff in schools governed by the 1969 Management Rules.
Final Decision: The court held that candidates not sponsored by the Employment Exchange have the right to participate in the selection process for non-teaching staff in schools governed by the 1969 Management Rules, as implied by the Supreme Court's decision in Abu Taker.
1. This Writ petition was filed by the petitioner praying for a mandamus directing the respondents to allow him to participate in selection process initiated by the school for recruitment and selection of Clerk- cum -Typist. When writ petition was considered by the learned Single Judge by order dated January 31, 2005, contentions of the respective parties and the subject-matter involved in the writ petition were considered. Notice was taken of the submission of the petitioner that in view of the decision of the Supreme Court dated February 12, 2002 in Abu Taker v. Abdul Wahab & Ors., Civil Appeal No. 1203 of 2001, and the decision of this Court by another learned Single Judge in Sanjay Kumar Ray v. State & Ors., 2005 (l) CHN 355 : 2005 (1) WBLR (Cal.) 130, the petitioner had a right to offer his candidature in the selection process in question provided he possessed the requisite qualifications prescribed for the post.
2. As the learned Single Judge considering the present writ petition expressed his disagreement with the view taken by the other learned Single Judge in the case of Sanjay Kumar Ray (supra) and was of the view that Special Bench decision in the case of Debasis Dutta v. State of West Bengal, 1998 (2) CLJ 1, still holds good and no law was laid down by the Supreme Court in the case of Abu Taker (supra) that a person will be entitled to offer his candidature in any recruitment process even though his name is not sponsored by the Employment Exchange for the said purpose, when relevant rules make such exercise a mandatory requirement and in view of the above opinion as the learned Judge was not in agreement with the other view for getting the question decided by a larger Bench, a direction was given to place the file before the Hon’ble Chief Justice recording the question involved as follows:
“ The question is : Whether the Supreme Court decision dated February 12th, 2002 given in Abu Taker v. Abdul Wahab & Ors., Civil Appeal No. 1203 of 2001, has in any manner overruled the Special Bench decision of this Court in Debasis Dutta v. State of West Bengal &. Ors., 1998 (2) CLJ 1, and whether as a result a person whose name is not sponsored by the Employment Exchange has a right of any nature to participate, as a candidate, in a selection process initiated by a school governed by the 1969 Management Rules (framed under the West Bengal Board of Secondary Education Act, 1963) for recruiting and selecting a person for appointment as a member of the nonteaching staff.”
3. The same learned Judge also referred to another writ petition being W.P. No. 214 (W) of 2005 on 1st February, 2005 to a larger Bench wherein by order dated February 3, 2005 the then Hon’ble Acting Chief Justice was pleased to constitute this Full Bench as a larger Bench to consider and decide the said question. Several other matters involving same question were referred to larger Bench and hence these matters were placed before the present Bench for a decision. Affidavit-in-opposition has been filed in the present writ petition and the petitioner agreed to proceed with the final hearing without filing any affidavit-in-reply. All the matters were heard together by this Bench in presence of and as agreed to by the respective learned Advocates for the respective parties.
4. On behalf of the petitioners main argument was advanced by Mr. Ashoke Kumar Maity, Mr. Sumit Kumar Panja and Mr. Gouri Shankar Dey and on behalf of the respondents argument was advanced by Mr. Rabilal Moitra, learned Government Pleader.
5. In support of the contentions of the petitioners and for arguing on the scope of the two relevant judgments, the judgment in the case of Debasis Dutta v. State of West Bengal decided by a three-member Special Bench of this Court and 1998(2) CLJ 1 and the judgment of the Apex Court in the case of Abu Taker v. Abdul Wahab, Civil Appeal No. 1203 of 2001, were placed in substantial detail.
6. On the said question as to whether candidates not sponsor
1. Abani Mahato v. Kanchan K. Sinha, 2000 (9) SCC 527 10
3. Arnit Das v. State of Bihar, 2000 (5) SCC 488 14
7. Kishore K. Pati v. District Inspector of Schools, 2000 (9) SCC 405 10
8. Malda District Primary Scnool Council v. Md. Faridur Rahaman, 2001 (1) CHN 204 .14
9. Malpe Viswanath Acharya v. State of Maharastra
11. Nadia District Primary School Council v. Sristidhar Biswas
12. Raj Kumar v. Shakti Raj, AIR 1997 SC 2110 : 1997 (9) SCC 527 8,19,21,22,25,26,35,39,44
14. Suganthi Suresh Kumar v. Jagdeeshan
AI
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.