17th Feb., 2026 In the High Court at Calcutta Item no.D/L 06 Court No. 18 Constitutional Writ Jurisdiction Pradip, A.R.(Ct.)

Appellate Side Case No. WPA 3336 of 2026 In the matter of :

Saikat Bhattacharjee & Ors.

…. Petitioners VS.

The State of West Bengal & Ors.

….Respondents For the Petitioners:

Mr. Pratik Dhar, Sr. Adv.

Mr. Ali Ahsan Alamgir Ms. Rabia Khatoon Ms. June Modak ….Advocates For the State:

Mr. Tarak Karan ….Advocate For the WBBSE:

Ms. Koyeli Bhattacharyya Mr. Bibek Datta Mr. Manas Bhattacharyya ….Advocates For the WBCSSC:

Mr. Kalyan Bandopadhyay, Sr. Adv.

Mr. Biswaroop Bhattacharyya Ms. Pramiti Bandopadhyay Mr. Arka Kumar Nag Mr. Rahul Kumar Singh ….Advocates

1. Affidavit of service and the receipt showing submission of deficit Court fees filed in Court today are taken on record.

2. The petitioners claim to be physically handicapped category candidates with benchmark locomotor disability.

3. They were initially issued reservation certificate mentioning that they were orthopedically handicapped. After implementation of the Rights of Persons with Disabilities Act, 2016, they have been issued reservation certificate by mentioning that they have locomotor disability.

4. The petitioners participated in the recruitment process, that is, SLST-

2025 conducted by the West Bengal Central School Service Commission. They filled in the application form by disclosing their category PH-OH and paid the application fees meant for reserved category candidates.

5. They are aggrieved as they have been treated as general, that is, unreserved category candidates.

6. Submission of the petitioners is that there was no scope and/or opportunity for the petitioners to disclose their nature of disability in the application form.

7. Reservation for the orthopedically handicapped or the candidates with locomotor disability was only available for the scheduled caste category candidates. For the unreserved/general category candidate, there was no opportunity to disclose their nature of disability.

8. It has been submitted that if the petitioners are not being provided the reservation in terms of the Act, then the same is illegal. The same is also contrary to the judgment passed by the Hon’ble Supreme Court on 3^rd April, 2025 in the matter of State of West Bengal Vs.

Baishakhi Bhattacharyya (Chatterjee) & Ors.

9. In paragraph 49 of the aforesaid judgment the Court specifically recorded that the disabled candidates will be allowed to participate in the fresh selection process, if required, with age relaxation and other concessions.

10. Non-granting the benefit of reservation to the general category physically handicapped candidates is also contrary to the order passed by the Hon’ble Supreme Court on 26 ^th November, 2025 in the matter of Bibek Paria & Ors. Vs. The State of West Bengal & Ors. wherein the Court directed that the High Court shall be mindful of the fact that the untainted candidates in the past selection were allowed to sit for the selections tests to be held afresh and their candidature cannot be adversely affected by application of the new Rules.

11. It has been submitted that the Labour Department of the State has published a notification on 27^th January, 2026 by publishing the model 100 point roster of vacancies. The said notification has been made in supersession of the department’s earlier notification dated 13^th June, 2025. The Commission is following the 100 point roster published by the department on 13^th June, 2025. The Commission ought to follow the roaster which was prevailing on the day of publication of the recruitment notice and not the one which came in the midst of the recruitment process which started in May, 2025.

12. An interim prayer has been made to direct the respondent Commission not to treat the petitioners as general category candidates for the time being.

13. The submissions and the prayer of the petitioners are opposed by the respondents.

14. It has been submitted that the recruitment notice has been published relying on the vacancy