Payel Maji @ Payel Malik v. State Of West Bengal And ORS.

09.07.2024 09.07.2024 Ct. No. 18 adeb W.P.A. 4641 of 2024 Payel Maji @ Payel Malik Vs.

The State of West Bengal & Ors.

Mr. Sabyasachi Chatterjee Mr. Nikhil Kr. Gupta ...for the petitioner Dr. Sutanu Kumar Patra Ms. Supriya Dubey ...for the WBCSSC Mr. Indranil Roy Mr. Tapas Kumar Mondal ...for the State Writ petition is taken up for consideration where petitioner has claimed that she participated in 1st State Level Selection Test (Upper Primary) 2016 being TET qualified candidate but the concerned authority of the West Bengal Central School Service Commission did not consider the candidature of the petitioner for being appointed in the post of assistant teacher in a Government aided school in upper primary section. The matter was heard on 2nd July, 2024 in presence of the learned advocates representing the parties when Dr. Sutanu Kumar Patra, learned advocate representing the Commission was directed to obtain instruction with regard to uploading credentials of the petitioner in connection with 1st SLST 2016 for consideration of her candidature.

Today, the learned advocate representing the Commission on instruction submits that unless particulars of the petitioner in connection with her application which she made for participating in the aforesaid selection process are supplied the Commission today is not in a position to apprise this Court with regard to the status of the petitioner being one of the candidates in the said selection process.

Considering such submission made on behalf of the Commission this Court has asked Mr. Sabyasachi Chatterjee, learned advocate representing the petitioner who is appearing online to show documents in support of participation of the petitioner in SLST 2016 (Upper Primary) and what was the roll number allotted in favour of the petitioner in connection with the said selection process. Court is also inclined to see the admit card which was issued by the Commission in favour of the petitioner in connection with her participation. Only the documents relating to participation of the petitioner in TET 2015 (Upper Primary) are provided in the writ petition The learned advocate representing the petitioner has not been able to produce any document or roll number in connection with participation of the petitioner in 1st SLST 2016 (Upper Primary) in order to substantiate the claim of the petitioner that she participated in the said selection process.

In view of aforesaid scenario this Court is not inclined to entertain this writ petition and accordingly this writ petition stands dismissed.

However, there shall be no order as to costs. Urgent photostat certified copy of the order, if applied for, be given to the parties, upon usual undertakings.

(Saugata Bhattacharyya, J.)