SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2025 Supreme(Online)(Cal) 7566

CALCUTTA HIGH COURT
DR. ASFAKULLA NAIYA – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF WEST BENGAL AND ORS. – Respondent
WPA 12310 / 2025



IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT CALCUTTA CONSTITUTIONAL WRIT JURISDICTION APPELLATE SIDE RESERVED ON: 19.03.2026 DELIVERED ON: 17.04.2026 PRESENT:

THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE REETOBROTO KUMAR MITRA WPA NO. 12310 OF 2025 DR. ASFAKULLA NAIYA - VERSUS –

THE STATE OF WEST BENGAL AND ORS.

Appearance:

Mr. Samim Ahammed, Adv.

Mr. Arka Maiti, Adv.

Ms. Gulsanwara Pervin, Adv. Ms. Saloni Bhattacharya, Adv.

Ms. Reshma Khatun, Adv.

….. for the Applicant/Petitioner Mr. Kalyan Bandopadhyay, Sr. Adv.

Ms. Pramiti Banerjee, Adv.

Mr. Arka Nag, Adv.

Mr. Debayan Sen, Adv.

Mr. Niket Ojha, Adv. ….. for the State Mr. D. N. Maiti, Adv.

Mr. A. Santra, Adv. …… for the respondent no. 5 Reetobroto Kumar Mitra, J.:

1. The petitioner is aggrieved that he has been posted from the medical college of his choice in Hooghly, while serving as a senior resident to Purulia.

2. The petitioner is a qualified medical practitioner, having successfully completed his post-graduate degree in Oto-rhino-laryngology from the Medical College, Kolkata, which is affiliated to the West Bengal University of Health Sciences (for short, “WBUHS”). The petitioner is duly registered with the Medical Council in the batch of 2021-2024. The petitioner participated in the counselling process and had also executed a bond, required of persons willing to serve as senior resident based on their final MD examination marks, in terms of the notification dated February 20, 2025, which invited eligible candidates to participate in the centralized counselling process for selection and posting of incumbents to various government hospitals in West Bengal.

3. Upon participation, the petitioner secured meritorious rank in the merit list of Oto-rhino-laryngology and was allotted the post of senior resident, based on his merit rank in Profulla Chandra Sen Government Medical College and Hospital, Hooghly. This was on the basis of the option exercised by the petitioner, on the basis whereof he has also made a self- declaration for SR bond engagement. This was in terms of the self-

declaration given by the petitioner that he was willing to be engaged in Profulla Chandra Sen Government Medical College and Hospital, Hooghly under the indemnity bond. The self-declaration was given on May 3, 2025.

4. Petitioner had been given a posting from the hospital of his choice, that is Profulla Chandra Sen Government Medical College and Hospital, to Deben Mahata Government Medical College and Hospital, Purulia, a facility not chosen by the petitioner in the course of counseling.

5. Mr. Samim Ahammed, appearing for the petitioner, has raised the following issues:

a. The posting of the petitioner is contrary to the self-declaration that he would not seek any change from the place of engagement opted by him, which was finalised.

b. The Standard Operating Procedure (hereinafter “SOP”)

envisaged in the Memo No. HF/O/HS(MA)/222/HFW- 43011(11)/152/2022-ADMIN dated February 16, 2023 (page

82 of the writ petition) has been grossly violated.

c. The engagement of the senior resident is strictly conducted through a structured and merit-based counseling process;

clause 7(a) stipulates that a post graduate degree holder will be engaged as a senior resident in medical colleges/teaching institutions for one year through counseling based on a merit list.

d. After completion of one year of bond service, the incumbent will be posted in a secondary tier hospital or a rural hospital through a second round of counseling based on the very same merit list. In fact, clause 7(d) makes it clear that pending final marks, temporary placement may be made at the parent institutions, though final posting must be strictly in accordance with the SOP.

e. Of the entire list of 871 candidates, there has been a selective procedure adopted for only a few persons, including the petitioner, which is in violation of the SOP.

f. The SOP has been followed for all the other 869 candidates but not for the petitioner and a few others.

g. He submits that, of the 778 candidates for the batch of

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top