Dhruba Sutradhar vs State Of West Bengal & Ors.

Re : CAN 5798 of 2015

This is an application arising out of an appeal preferred against a judgment and order dated February 13, 2015 passed in the writ applications filed in

the matter of (1) Dhruba Sutradhar vs. The State of West Bengal & Ors. [In Re: W.P. No.32915 (W) of 2014] and (2) Achintya Kumar Das vs. The

State of West Bengal & Ors. [In Re: W.P. No.24181 (W) of 2008]. By virtue of the order impugned to this appeal, the former writ application was

dismissed and later one was ke-pt pending for hearing.

Having heard the learned Counsel appearing for the respective parties as also after considering the facts and circumstances of this case, we find that

a selection process was initiated by the respondent Nos.4 and 5 for recruitment of a clerk. The writ application bearing W.P. No.24181 (W) of 2008

was filed by an existing groupD staff of the respondent No.4. According to the above writ petitioner, he was not allowed to participate in the above

selection process arbitrarily by the school authority. No interim relief was granted in favour of the petitioner.

The writ application was kept pending with the observation that the selection process should abide by the results of the above writ application.

Thereafter, the selection process took place and a panel of selected candidates was forwarded to the respondent authority for approval. The above

panel was approved by the competent authority on November 25, 2010. The name of the appellant/writ petitioner in W.P. No.32915 (W) of 2014

appeared on top of the above panel. Since the respondent school sat tight over the matter, the panel expired. Thereafter the appellant filed the above

writ application bearing W.P. No.32915 (W) of 2014.

The learned Single Judge arrived at a conclusion that the subject matter of challenge in the writ application bearing W.P. No.24181 (W) of 2008 was

not the panel in question because the same had been filed prior to the preparation of the above panel. The subject matter of challenge in the above

writ application being the alleged arbitrary action on the part of the respondent school in not allowing the writ petitioner to participate in the selection

process. The learned Single Judge further arrived at a conclusion that after expiry of the lifetime of the panel in question in accordance with the

provisions of relevant Rules, the same could not be treated as valid because no litigation was pending at that point of time.

The writ application bearing W.P. No.32915 (W) of 2014 was filed by the appellant after expiry of the validity of that panel. Considering the aforesaid

reasons, we do not find any error or illegality in the above findings. Therefore our interference is not required on the above ground so far as the

judgment impugned to this appeal is concerned. We are of the further opinion that once the validity of the panel in question expired and no relief was

granted in favour of the appellant in the writ application the issue involved in the writ application bearing W.P. No.24181 (W) of 2008 becomes

academic one.

Since no other issue is involved in this appeal, this appeal is treated as on day’s list with the consent of the parties and the same is also taken up

for hearing. with the discussions and observations made hereinabove, this appeal stands dismissed together with the above application. There will be,

however, no order as to costs. Urgent photostat certified copy of this order, if applied for, be given to the parties at an early date.