Saifuddin Arif And ORS. v. The State Of West Bengal And ORS.
25.04.2025 Court No. 18 Item No. 56 (Suvendu) WPA 8142 of 2025 Saifuddin Arif & Ors.
-Versus- The State of West Bengal & Ors.
Mr. Anindya Bose Mr. Golam Mohiuddin Mr. Mridul Biswas ....for the petitioners Mr. Subir Sanyal Mr. Ratul Biswas Mr. Kaushik Chowdhury ...for the WBBPE Mr. Akash Dutta ...for the State Petitioners have approached this Court with the present writ petition with common prayer for supply of OMR sheets in connection with Teacher Eligibility Test, 2014 (for short, "TET, 2014").
It is submitted by learned advocate representing the petitioners that TET, 2014 was conducted by West Bengal Board of Primary Education (hereinafter referred to as "Board") in 2015. Result was published on 14th September, 2016. Petitioners made applications under the Right to Information Act, 2005 on 19th March, 2025 praying for supply of OMR sheets and
thereafter filed the present writ petition on 8th April, 2025.
This Court cannot brush aside the facts that result of TET, 2014 was published on 14th September, 2016 and thereafter for a period of precisely nine years petitioners did not take steps for obtaining copies of OMR sheets in connection with TET, 2014.
Belatedly application under the Right to Information Act, 2005 was made on 19th March, 2025 and subsequently on 8th April, 2025 present writ petition has been instituted seeking supply of copies of OMR sheets in connection with TET, 2014 which was held in 2015.
In this regard, reliance is placed on the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court reported in (2007) 9 Supreme Court Cases 278 (New Delhi Municipal Council Vs. Pan Singh and Ors.) In paragraph 17 of said judgment it has been succinctly held by the Hone'ble Supreme Court that although there is no period of limitation provided for filing a writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, ordinarily writ petition should be filed within a reasonable time.
In the present case, petitioners have preferred applications under the Right to
Information Act, nine years after publication of result and thereafter filed the present writ petition.
Moreover, Mr Sanyal, learned Senior Advocate representing the Board has submitted that result of TET, 2014 was published on 14th September, 2016 and on the same day on website of the Board a notice was published inviting applications from the candidates who participated in TET, for obtaining photocopies of OMR sheets or digitized data sheets upon payment of requisite costs. Time which was provided to approach the Board in terms of notice dated 14th September, 2016 was thirty days. Petitioners did not avail said opportunity.
Hence, no relief can be granted to the petitioners at this belated stage.
Writ petition stands dismissed.
Urgent photostat certified copy of this order, if applied for, be given to the parties on usual undertaking.
(Saugata Bhattacharyya, J.)