Mishtu Saha v. State Of West Bengal And ORS.

S/L 14 25.03.2021 Court No.26 SD WPA 5974 of 2021 (Via Video Conference) Mistu Saha Vs.

The State of West Bengal & Ors.

Mr. Sakti Pada Jana ... for the Petitioner.

Ms. Chaitali Bhattacharyya ... for the State.

Ms. Koyeli Bhattacharyya ... for the Board.

This is a peculiar situation wherein in spite of recommendation of the West Bengal Central School Service Commission and the appointment made by the West Bengal Board of Secondary Education, the petitioner is still without a job.

Mr. Sakti Pada Jana, counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner, submits that when the petitioner went to join the school wherein he had been appointed, he was informed that somebody else had been appointed in her place. It is to be noted that this issue relates to the year 2018 and till date the petitioner is languishing without a job. Several representations have been made by her, but it appears that the authorities are busy with some other matters and cannot take up her matter.

In light of the above, Commissioner of School Education is directed to immediately call for a vacancy list in the district of Uttar Dinajpur and Malda from the District

Inspector of Schools (SE) concerned within a period of two weeks.

Upon receipt of such vacancy list, the Commissioner of School Education is directed to immediately recommend the name of the petitioner for appointment in one of the schools that is vacant and pass on the said file to the West Bengal Central School Service Commission who shall in turn recommend the same to the West Bengal Board of Secondary Education and the Board shall carry out the appointment of the petitioner.

I make it clear that the entire process should be completed within a period of ten weeks from date. I further make it clear that in the event the District Inspector of Schools does not provide the vacancy list within a period of two weeks from date, appropriate action should be taken against him.

In the event, appointment is not made within a period of ten weeks as indicated above, the petitioner shall be at liberty to move before this Court for implementation of this order, if so advised.

With these above observations and directions, this writ petition stands disposed of.

Since, no affidavit-in-opposition has been called for the allegations made in the writ petition are deemed to have not been admitted by the respondents.

There will be no order as to costs.

Urgent photostat certified copy of this order, if applied for, be given to the parties upon compliance of all necessary formalities.

(Shekhar B. Saraf, J.)