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

THE HON’BLE JUSTICE ARINDAM MUKHEREJEE With CAN 1 of 2025 CAN 2 of 2025 AISWARYA RAJYA RAI & ORS.

VS.

THE HON’BLE HIGH COURT, CALCUTTA SERVICE THROUGH THE LEARNED REGISTRAR GENERAL & ORS.

For the petitioner :: Mr. Biswaroop Bhattacharya, Mr. Pratik Majumder, Ms. Neelanjana Ghorai.

.....Advocates Mr. Jaydip Kar, Sr. Adv., For The High Court Mr. Saikat Bnaerjee, Administration :

Mr. Gourav Das, Mr. Shirsho Banerjee ......Advocates For the State : Mr. Dipanjan Dutta Ms. Paromita Malakar Ms. Piyali Sengupta For the PSC :

Mr. Souvik Ghosh .....Advocates For the Applicants : Mr. Billwadal Bhattacharyya Sr. Adv.

Mr. Sayak Chakraborti, Mr. Anish Kumar Mukherjee, Ms. Megha Datta, Mr. Wrickbrata Roy, Mr. Tamoghna Pramanick …..Advocates (CAN 1 of 2025 & CAN 2 of 2025)

Heard On : 13.12.2024 & 16.12.2024 Judgment on : 18^th March, 2025.

Arindam Mukherjee, J.:

The petitioners are 7 (seven) in number. They had participated in the West Bengal Judicial Service Examination (hereinafter referred to as the „said examination‟), 2022, the advertisement in respect whereof was published on 30^th December, 2022. The petitioners have filed the writ petition on 29^th August, 2024 to challenge the selection process conducted for the said examination, inter alia, on the ground that the exact number of vacancies available to be filled up through the said examination was not advertised on 30th December, 2022, as a consequence whereof the chances of the petitioners in getting appointment got reduced, though the name of the petitioners are included in the select list published by the West Bengal Public Service Commission (hereinafter referred to as „PSC‟) on 14th May, 2024.

A. The Case of the Petitioners in Brief:-

1) The petitioner nos. 1, 2 and 3 belong to general category, the petitioner nos. 4, 5 and 6 belong to Scheduled Caste (SC), whereas petitioner no. 7 belongs to Scheduled Tribe (ST), category. It is the case of the petitioner that the said examination was conducted to fill up 12 „Clear Vacancies‟ and 17 „Anticipated Vacancies‟, occurring in the cadre of Civil Judge (Junior Division). As per the advertisement under the „clear vacancy‟ category there are 8 unreserved (in short „UR‟) vacancies, 1 (one) SC, 1 (one) ST and 1 (one) Other Backward Classes – A ( in short „OBC-A‟), and 1 (one) OBC-B. Under „anticipated vacancies‟, there are 10 (UR), SC-2, ST–1, OBC–A – 2, OBC-B – 1 and PwBD – 1. PSC after conducting the said examination had published a select list comprising of 54 candidates. The petitioners have been respectively placed in serial nos. 29, 27, 22, 42, 46, 51 and 49 of the said select list. This indicates that the petitioners have respectively achieved the said ranks in the examination. After publication of the „select‟ list the PSC prepared the list recommending the successful candidates for appointment on 14^th May, 2024. Recommendation list was in 2(two) parts, a set of candidates as according to their rank and reserved category have been recommended to fill up the „clear vacancy‟ and other set according to their rank has been recommended for being appointed against the „anticipated vacancy‟. Up to this stage the petitioners have not raised any protest regarding the selection process or the manner and in the way the said examination was conducted and/or held.

2) The petitioner no. 3 made an application under Right to Information Act, 2005 (in short „RTI Act‟) to the Public Information Officer, West Bengal Judicial Department and also to Registrar General, of this Court (hereinafter referred to for the sake of consequence referred to as „R.G.‟), inter alia, seeking information as to how many „anticipated‟ and „clear‟ vacancies are available as on 31st December, 2022 for the post of Civil Judge (Junior Division) in West Bengal.

3) The story of the petitioners‟ starts from here. The petitioners say that in reply to the query made under the RTI Act, the said Public Informati