Sanghamitra Biswas Sarkar v. State Of West Bengal And ORS.
28.01.2022 SL No. 97 Court No. 24 (P.M) WPA 915 of 2022 Sanghamitra Biswas (Sarkar) Vs The State of West Bengal & Ors.
(Via Video Conference) Mr. Lalratan Mandal ... for the petitioner Mr. Ratul Biswas ... for the Board Md. Sarwar Jahan, Sk. Nayeemul Haque ... for the respondent No. 5 The petitioner participated in the TET 2012 as well as TET 2014 examinations.
The petitioner, in paragraph 6 of the writ petition, has averred that "many a candidate has been favoured with 6 marks in the written examination of TET-2014 for the wrong questions and wrong key answers in the OMR Sheet and on the same basis your petitioner well deserves to get 6 marks more in the mark sheet of TET-2014 inasmuch as the petitioner attempted all such questions and in that event the petitioner is sure to be fairly selected for the post of Primary Teacher."
In paragraph 7 of the writ petition it has been averred that "in view of the order passed by the Hon'ble High Court, Calcutta dated 05.01.2021 many
a similarly circumstanced candidate has been allowed six (6) marks and if your petitioner gets that six marks she has ample scope for being selected as a Primary Teacher like those similarly circumstanced candidates".
Though the petitioner has relied upon an order dated 5th January, 2021 neither the copy of the order nor the writ petition number has been mentioned or annexed to the writ petition in respect of similarly situated candidates in whose favour the order has been passed.
The petitioner prays for a direction upon the respondent authorities to forthwith issue certificate in her favour for qualifying in TET-2014 and to award six more marks to her.
It appears from the submissions made on behalf of the petitioner that she appeared in the examination way back in 2014 and all on a sudden in the year 2022 she woke up from her slumber and approached this Court praying for awarding six marks in respect of wrong questions which has been set in the TET Examination 2014.
The petitioner has not produced any document to show that she attempted the disputed questions. There is also no averment in the writ petition with regard to the questions which were allegedly
wrongly set by the Board. The petitioner has failed to annex any document in support of the facts relied upon by her to get an order in her favour.
The writ petition is thoroughly misconceived and is liable to be dismissed.
The writ petition stands dismissed.
Urgent photostat certified copy of this order, if applied for, be given to the parties on completion of usual formalities.
(Amrita Sinha, J.)