Partha Mukherjee And ORS v. Aktarul Islam Kayal And ORS

Dl.

8.

March 16, Through Video Conference M.A.T. 3 of 2021 Mr. Ashis Kumar Chowdhury, Mr. Rajib Ghosh, Mr. Deborupa Mukherjee, ...for the appellants.

Mr. Bhaskar Prosad Vaisya, Mr. Suman Dey, ...for the State respondents.

The learned advocate appearing on behalf of the appellants submits that following the affirmation of the order passed by Justice Moushumi Bhattacharya in W.P.A. 9597 of 2019 on December 11, 2019, the verification process have already started in which the appellants have participated. In view thereof, the appellants are not interested to proceed with the present application for leave to appeal filed under CAN 2 of 2021. Since the issues raised in this appeal have already been decided by us on January 12, 2021 in M.A.T. 843 of 2020, the said judgment governs the present appeal. In fact, while dismissing the appeal being M.A.T.

843 of 2020 filed by some of the candidates similarly placed with that of the present appellants, we have observed that dismissal of the said appeal shall not prejudice the rights of the appellants to participate in the verification process in terms of the notification being no. 689/6723/CSSC/ESTT/2020 dated December 28, 2020. The nature of dispute involved in this appeal is similar to that of M.A.T. 843 of 2020.

appellants, the application for leave to appeal stands dismissed for non-prosecution.

Consequently, the memorandum of appeal and the connected applications, if there be any, stand rejected. There will be no order as to costs.

( Soumen Sen, J. ) ( Saugata Bhattacharyya, J. ) dns