High CourtsSingle Bench

Jeenata Panchakoti vs State Of West Bengal & Ors

Calcutta High Court · Decided on 17 April 2026 · Citation: (2026) 04 CAL CK 0599

HON’BLE JUDGES
Raja Basu Chowdhury, J
RESULT
Disposed Of
CASE NUMBER
Writ Petition No. 2547 Of 2025
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

13 paragraphs · 563 words

Raja Basu Chowdhury, J

1.

The present petition has been filed, inter alia, for a direction upon the Gorkhaland Territorial Administration Council (hereinafter referred to as the GTA) as well as the District Inspector of Schools to regularize and approve the appointment of the petitioner as Assistant Teacher of Nepali in Panighatta High School(H.S.) on permanent basis forthwith. The petitioner claims to have been appointed by the Secretary of the concerned school on a temporary basis.

2.

Ms. Singh, learned advocate appears for the GTA.

3.

Mr. Paul, learned advocate appears for the State.

4.

The parties would jointly submit that the petitioner is similarly placed with the petitioners in WPA 2506 of 2025.

5.

Having regard thereto, since a batch of petitions had already been disposed of by this Court by the judgment and order dated 9th April, 2026, I am of the view that the petitioner who is similarly placed should also be considered in terms of the directions issued in WPA 2506 of 2025.

6.

Accordingly the operative portion of the order passed in WPA 2506 of 2025 is noted herein below:

"I find that in the instant case, the petitioners' claim to be working on temporary basis voluntary in sanctioned vacant post. The said stand of the petitioners is yet to be tested in a sense that final enquiry in this regard may be necessary for being undertaken by the GTA. However, having regard to the judgments delivered in Ajay Kumar Kharka (supra) and the judgments delivered by the Co-ordinate Bench in the case of Kishan Rai & Ors. (supra), Siddanth Rai & Ors. (supra), Wangal Lepcha & Ors. (supra), in my view, the respondents having regularized the appointment of other similarly placed candidates such benefit cannot be denied to the petitioners, if on scrutiny, it appears that the petitioners are similarly placed. For the said purpose, I am of the view that the GTA Education Department, at the first instance, must enquire the number of sanctioned permanent posts which have already been sanctioned in respect of the schools in the region and thereafter to ascertain the vacancy status in respect of each particular school and in the process as aforesaid, if it is found that the respective petitioners are working in sanctioned vacant posts and if, the respondents find on the basis of verification of the eligibility criteria of the respondents, the respective petitioners are eligible on the basis of the procedure as applicable in the State, then the permanent vacancies which are found to be vacant and have not been filled up shall be filled up in accordance with the procedure and guidelines already available against such subject wise vacancies in terms of the observations made in the case of Kishan Rai & Ors. (supra).

The above exercise must be completed by the concerned respondents on an expeditious basis preferably, within a period of 16 weeks from the date of communication of this order.

With the above observations and directions, the writ petition is disposed of."

7.

The writ petition stands disposed of by directing similar benefit to be made available to the petitioner in accordance with the procedure noted above.

8.

With the above observations and directions, the writ petition is disposed of.

9.

Urgent certified photo copy of this order, if applied for, be supplied to the parties expeditiously on compliance of usual legal formalities.