High CourtsSingle Bench

Jayanta Adhikary vs State of West Bengal & Ors.

Calcutta High Court · Decided on 20 August 2018 · Citation: (2018) 08 CAL CK 0049

HON’BLE JUDGES
SUBRATA TALUKDAR, J
CASE NUMBER
Writ Petition No. 7391 (W) of 2018
Ask AI about this case

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

No AI summary yet

Generate an eight-section analysis of this judgment — facts, issues, reasoning, ratio and a plain-language gist.

Judgment

37 paragraphs · 737 words

Interesting facts have emerged for consideration in this writ petition which appertains to recruitment to posts at the Gram Panchayat and Panchayat

Samiti (for short GP and PS) levels within the district of Cooch Behar.

At issue in this writ petition is the recruitment to the posts of Clerk-cum-Typist which is stated to have commenced on the 5th of December, 2013 vide

Employment Notification No. PRD/1328/X-1 and continued up to November, 2017 vide Memo No. PRD 918/X-1 dated 16th December, 2016.

The petitioner represented by Mr. Basu, learned Advocate submits that for appointment to the post of Clerk-cum-Typist the schedule of the

examination/test mandates, inter alia, that short-listed candidates will have to undergo a screening test cum typing speed, which will be 30 words per

minute in English and 20 words per minute in Bengali. It was also specified in the recruitment notice that such screening test will be taken through

personal computers.

Candidates short-listed/ successful in such screening test and/or considered to have qualified in the typing test were to be allowed to appear in the viva

voce vide the Memo dated 30th November, 2017. However, the petitioner alleges that in his case the type test was not performed.

Referring to Page 42 of the writ petition being a Memo dated 28th December, 2017 in respect of candidates from the neighbouring Jalpaiguri district, it

is submitted by the petitioner that the computer screening type test comprises an integral part of the examination. It is submitted that it is arbitrary on

the part of the Recruiting Authority to deviate from the examination pattern and publish a final list of purportedly successful candidates as would

appear from page 44 of the writ petition.

On behalf of the State-Respondents, Mr. Galib, learned Counsel stresses the point that the petitioner is an ultimately unsuccessful candidate who

cannot be allowed to turn around to challenge the selection process. Mr. Galib submits that it is within the domain of the Recruiting Authority to decide

on the modality of the recruitment in consonance with the Rules thereof. In the facts of this case, learned State Counsel points out that allotment of

marks have been made for a written examination and for the interview. It is not the case of the petitioner that he was called for the viva-voce being

found ultimately suitable in the written test.

In support of his above noted submission, learned State Counsel relies on the authorities as reported in AIR 1991 SC 2248 (Sardara Singh & Ors. vs.

State of Punjab & Ors.) and (1995) 3 SCC 486 (Madan Lal and Others vs. State of J & K and Others). Having heard the parties and considering the

materials placed, this Court finds as follows:-

(a) That the selection is to the post of Clerk-cum-Typist;

(b) That the Rules of Selection carry marks for both written test and for viva voce;

(c) The written test involves a component of screening through a typing test both in English and in Bengali;

(d) Such screening is in consonance with the nature of the post required to be filled in, which is that of Clerk-cum-Typist;

(e) Nothing has been brought to the notice of this Court as on date that the typing/computer screening test has been held by the Recruiting Authority

qua the petitioner;

This Court must also not fail in observing that such test is essential to the nature of the post sought to be filled up, viz. clerk-cum-typist. Therefore, this

Court directs that the record of selection culminating in the final list of selectees to the posts of Clerk-cum-Typist in all categories in the district of

Cooch Behar as conducted pursuant to the Memos being PRD/1328/X-1 dated 5th December, 2013 and PRD 918/X-1 dated 16th December, 2016 be

produced in sealed cover through learned State Counsel on the next date.

It is further directed that the final selection shall not be given effect to without the leave of the Court. Registry is directed to communicate this order to

the Respondent Nos. 2 and 3 being the District Magistrate, Cooch Behar and The Chairman, District level Selection Committee, Office of the District

Magistrate, Cooch Behar respectively.

Registry to file a Report on the next date. The petitioner shall also communicate this order to the Respondent Nos. 2 and 3 and file an Affidavit of

Service on the next date. Let the matter return under the heading ‘Mentioned Matters’ on 11th September, 2018.