Dated : 12.12.2025 Sl. No. : 22. Ct. No. : 18.

Officer : AGM.

In The High Court At Calcutta Constitution Writ Jurisdiction Appellate Side WPA 28629 of 2025 Nupur Ghosal & Ors.

Vs The State of West Bengal & Ors.

Mr. Firdous Samim.

Ms. Gopa Biswas.

Mr. Hasanuz Samim Molla.

Ms. Ankita Ghosh.

Mr. Ayush Majumdar. ……For the petitioner.

Mr. Biswaroop Bhattacharya.

Mr. Arka Kumar Nag.

Mr. Rahul Kumar Singh.

… For the WBCSSC.

Mr. Sirsanya Bandopadhyay. Sr. S.C.

Mr. Tarak Karan.

Mr. Sandip Das Gupta.

Ms. Mahima Chobera.

Mr. Niket Ojha.

… For the State.

Ms. Koyeli Bhattacharya.

Mr. Bibek Datta.

… For the WBBSE.

1. The petitioners participated in the recruitment process conducted by the West Bengal Central School Service Commission, 2025 in respect of classes XI-XII and IX-X respectively.

2. They have been found to be disqualified for interview and lecture demonstration on the ground of over age and their names have been incorporated in the list published by the Commission on 22^nd November, 2025.

3. According to the petitioners, as they are the untainted unappointed candidates of the 2016 recruitment process, they ought to be given the benefit of age relaxation.

4. Prayer has been made to permit the petitioners to participate in the interview process.

5. The aforesaid submission of the petitioners is opposed by the respondents. Submission is that the petitioners approached the Court at a very delayed point of time. There is no declaration of the status of the petitioners whether they are untainted or not.

6. It has been further submitted that if the petitioners are permitted to take the interview, then the entire selection process may be jeopardised.

7. The petitioners have placed reliance on the order passed by this Court on 3^rd December, 2025 in WPA 27648 of 2025 in the matter of Subir Sarkar & Ors. –Vs- The State of West Bengal & Ors wherein in respect of the non-teaching staff, the Court permitted the untainted unappointed candidates of the 2016 recruitment process to participate in the present recruitment process with age relaxation.

8. It is noted that if the writ petition is allowed, then the petitioners would be entitled to the benefit of age relaxation. After the selection process is over, it may not be possible for the Commission to immediately accommodate the petitioners in any declared vacancy.

9. Accordingly, as an interim measure the Commission is directed to permit the petitioners to participate in the interview and lecture demonstration process.

10. The marks obtained by the petitioners in the interview and lecture demonstration shall not be published by the Commission but will be retained in a sealed cover to be placed before this Court as and when called for.

11. If it is found that the petitioners secure marks more than the last qualified candidate in the interview and the lecture demonstration, then only the writ petition will be taken up for further consideration.

12. The petitioners have prayed for a direction upon the authority to conduct in-camera interview in the selection process.

13. In support of such submission reliance has been placed on the judgment delivered by the five judge bench of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the matter of Ajay Hasia & Ors. –vs- Khalid Mujib Sehravardi & Ors reported in (1981) 1 Supreme Court Cases 722 paragraph 19.

14. Reliance has also been placed on the judgment delivered by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the matter of State of Meghalaya & Anr. –vs- Phikirbha Khariah & Ors. reported in (2018) 6 Supreme Court Cases 618 paragraph 4.

15. The Supreme Court in aforesaid matters observed that it is desirable that the State Selection Boards and Bodies conducting the public selection process conducts the interview under CCTV cameras so that the footage thereof may be seen by an independent committee and the report of such committee may be placed on the website concerned.

16. Learned advocate for the petitioners has drawn the attention of the Court to the notice for interview/viva voce and aptitude test published by the West Ben