Suranjan Adhikary v. State Of West Bengal & ORS

03-09-2025 ct no. 23 Sl. 145 sp WPA No. 2152 of 2010 Suranjan Adhikary -VersusState of West Bengal & Ors.

1.

The petitioner approached this Court by filing the instant writ petition, seeking direction upon the respondents to immediately take effective steps to cancel/rescind/quash the appointment made in the post of Panchayat Peon in Purba Medinipur in the year 2007 along with other consequential reliefs.

2.

None appears on behalf of either of the parties.

3.

No accommodation is sought for.

4.

This case pertains to the year 2010. Almost 15 years have been elapsed. No affidavit-inopposition and affidavit-in-reply have yet been filed.

5.

Considering the nature of prayer and long pendency of this case, this Court proposes to dispose of the present application on the merits on the basis of materials available on record.

6.

It is the contention of the petitioner that in pursuant to the direction passed by this Court on 24th February, 2006 in WP 3829 (W) of 2006, the petitioner was, however, allowed to appear in the written test in the post of Panchayat Peon in Purba Medinipur of a admit card issued on 31st May, 2000.

7.

It is further contended that in view of such order, he appeared in the written test held in the selection process and he was figured out successful candidate for oral test. He was invited to appear in person for oral test which was held on 13th January, 2007 at the office of the Additional District Magistrate (Div.), Purba Medinipur at Tamluk and asked to submit his all testimonials along with attested copy.

8.

After a long period of time, the respondents did not communicate to the candidate/petitioner about the fate of the result of the said examination. His further case is that he secured 53.5 marks and the petitioner was only awarded 5 marks because no sufficient questions were put to him during interview. If he would have put some more questions, he would have succeeded.

9.

In the above backdrop, this Court finds the grounds set forth in the application is not at all tenable in law. It is the prerogative and wisdom of the interview that Board, what questions they will put to the candidates depending on the circumstances. It is totally a disputed question of facts which cannot be decided in the writ jurisdiction. Accordingly, this writ petition has no merit.

10.

Hence, WPA 2152 of 2010 is dismissed.

11.

Consequently, connected applications, if any, shall stand disposed of.

12.

Interim order, if any, stands vacated.

13.

There shall be no order as to costs.

14.

All the concerned parties shall act on the server copy of this order duly downloaded from the official website of this Court.

(Ajay Kumar Gupta, J.)