IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA CONSTITUTIONAL WRIT JURISDICTION APPELLATE SIDE Present:

The Hon’ble Justice Rai Chattopadhyay WPA 5090 of 2009 With CAN 1 of 2022 Bhagirath Bauri Vs.

State of West Bengal & Ors.

With WPA 21217 of 2014 With CAN 1 of 2014 (Old No. CAN 9475 of 2014)

Kanai Lal Bouri Vs.

State of West Bengal & Ors.

For the Petitioner : Mr. Subhrangsu Panda : Mr. Iva Bhattacharyya : Ms. Mithu Singha Mahapatra : Ms. Bratati Pramanik : Ms. Haritri Roy For the WBBSE : Ms. Koyeli Bhattacharyya : Mr. Bibek Dutta For the State : Mr. Supriyo Chattopadhyay, ld. AGP : Ms. Iti Dutta Judgment on : 08.08.2025 Rai Chattopadhyay, J. :-

1. The subject matter of the writ petitions as mentioned above are related to each other, hence the writ petitions as above have been taken up for being heard together and are being disposed of by dint of the common judgment as follows.

2. The matters relate to the grievances of the writ petitioners that the appointment to the post of group – D in the school namely Shankhari Bansberia High School [herein after referred to as the „said school‟] has been done illegally and hence is unsustainable, due to the reason that the appointee did not possess a valid school leaving certificate and produced a fake one, at the time of his appointment; hence in cancellation of such appointment of the person, the writ petitioner, who is the 2nd empanelled candidate, should be appointed [in the writ petition No. W.P.5090 (w) of 2009]. In the other matter, the petitioner‟s order of suspension is under challenge. That is for the reason that allegedly the order of suspension of the writ petitioner is de-hors the law, insofar as the same is unreasonable and arbitrary, having been passed by not affording any opportunity of hearing to the writ petitioner [in the writ petition No. WPA 21217 of 2014].

3. The background facts may be stated in a nutshell, which is as follows. The local employment exchange has sponsored names of number of candidates including the two writ petitioners pursuant to the prior permission accorded by the District Inspector of Schools (Secondary Education) Purulia [here in after referred to as „the DI‟], for being appointed in the post of a group-D staff (peon), in the said school. An interview was held on March 18, 2008 and the panel was prepared. The writ petitioner in WPA 21217 of 2014 [namely, Kanailal] occupied first position therein whereas the writ petitioner in W.P.5090 (w) of 2009 [namely, Bhagirath] has occupied the 2^nd position. Immediately thereafter, on May 29, 2008, Bhagirath submitted his complaint letter before the DI that the first empanelled candidate did not possess valid credentials, particularly the school leaving certificate from the school at Jharkhand State and certificate if any submitted by the said candidate is only a fake one. Bhagirath has alleged in a writ petition that the authority has been sitting tight over the complaint lodged by him regarding lack of genuineness of the certificate submitted by the first empanelled candidate due to some ulterior motive. He has urged in his writ petition that necessary enquiry is required to be done as regards genuineness of the school leaving certificate of the first empanelled candidate or otherwise, being the next empanelled candidate and eligible for being appointed in case the necessary credential of the first empanelled candidate is detected to be a fake one, his rights for being appointed in the said post shall be immensely jeopardised. Bhagirath as prayed for a direction upon the DI for conduct of an enquiry as to the genuineness of the school leaving certificate of the first empanelled candidate, which was produced at the time of interview held on March 18, 2008 and to take steps for recast of the panel and for his appointment, based on the result of such enquiry which might reveal the school leaving certificate produced by the other candidate as a fake document.

4. During pendency of the said writ petition the first empanelled candid