##PAGE1##

22.12.2025

Sl. No.605(DL)

Ct. No.14

srm

IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA

CONSTITUTIONAL WRIT JURISDICTION

APPELLATE SIDE

W.P.A. No. 26249 of 2025

With

CAN 1 of 2025

Sankarsan Barman & Ors.

Versus

The State of West Bengal & Ors.

Mr. Sabyasachi Chatterjee,

Mr. Badrul Karim,

Mr. Aritra Ghosh

…for the Petitioners.

Mr. Piush Chaturvedy, Sr. Adv.

Mr. Chittapriya Ghosh,

Ms. Priyanka Saha

…for the Applicants.

Mr. Subir Sanyal, Sr. Adv.

Mr. Ratul Biswas,

Mr. Kaushik Chowdhury

…for the WBBPE.

Mr. Supriyo Chattopadhyay, AGP

Ms. Iti Dutta

…for the State.

Mr. Asha G. Ghutghutia

…for the NCTE.

Re: CAN 1 of 2025

1. This is an application for addition of party.

2. The applicants contend that they are candidates who

have applied for participating in the ongoing

recruitment process vide Notification

No.2141/WBBPE/2025/59R-09/2024 dated 25^th

September, 2025 read with Notification

No.2367/WBBPE/2025/59R-09/2024 dated 19^th

November, 2025. They seek for impleading them as

2

added respondents as the issue in the writ petition is

relevant to the right of the applicants.

3. Mr. Piush Chaturvedi, learned Senior Advocate

appearing for the applicants submits that rights of the

petitioner will be affected in the event the prayers made

by the petitioners in the writ petition is considered

without hearing them. The applicants have already

participated in the ongoing recruitment process in

relation to which the petitioners also intend to take

part and as such, the applicants are necessary parties

in the writ petition.

4. On the contrary, Mr. Sabyasachi Chatterjee, learned

Advocate for the respondents/writ petitioners submits

that applicants are no way affected by the prayers

made by the petitioners in the writ petition. The

applicants cannot be said to be prejudiced if the

respondents/writ petitioners are allowed to participate

in the ongoing recruitment process. He seeks for

dismissal of the application.

5. The applicants claim that they are eligible candidates

and have already participated in the ongoing

recruitment process. In light of the above, this Court

finds that they are necessary parties.

6. Accordingly, the applicants be impleaded as

respondent Nos.8 to 11 in the writ petition.

7. Leave is granted to the learned Advocate for the

petitioners to make necessary amendment in the cause

title of the writ petition.

3

8. Learned Advocate-on-record for the petitioners is

directed to serve copy of the amended cause title to the

learned Advocate-on-record for the applicants as well

as other respondents.

9. Accordingly, CAN 1 of 2025 stands disposed of.

Re: WPA 26249 of 2025

10. Heard Mr. Sabyasachi Chatterjee, learned Advocate for

the petitioners, who concludes his arguments.

11. Mr. Subir Sanyal, learned Senior Advocate for the

Board also concludes his argument.

12. Argument advanced by Mr. Piush Chaturvedi, learned

Senior Advocate for the added respondents is also

concluded.

13. Mr. Sabyasachi Chatterjee seeks accommodation to

place his reply.

14. List this matter on 9^th January, 2026

(Bivas Pattanayak, J.)