Ananya Basak v. Union Of India And ORS.

20.05.2026 Court No.18 pg.

IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA

CONSTITUTIONAL WRIT JURISDICTION APPELLATE SIDE WPA 9297 of 2026 Ananya Basak -versus Union of India & Ors.

Mr. Sunil Kumar Gupta ... For the petitioner Mr. Aniruddha Bagchi Mr. Arun Bandyopadhyay ... For Union of India Mr. Soujanya Bandyopadhyay Mr. Supriya Ghosh ... For the respondent nos.2 to 5 1.

Exception by the petitioner to the report filed by the respondents in Court today be retained with the records.

2.

A chart prepared by the Registrar, Indian Association for the Cultivation of Science, Jadavpur, disclosing the category, qualification, experience and the marks obtained by the candidates who participated in the recruitment process for the Administrative Staff has been placed before this Court.

3.

It appears therefrom that the petitioner secured the highest marks and has been placed in serial no.1 of the merit list prepared by the authority. 4.

The appointment letter that was issued in her favour has been cancelled on the ground that she does not fulfill the essential eligibility criteria.

5.

The essential eligibility criterion for recruitment in the post of Upper Division Clerk is Graduate. The candidate has to be between 18 and 25 years and three years'

experience having good knowledge of English and computer applications for office work is required. The petitioner has three years' experience as Office Assistant.

6.

Upon hearing the submissions made on behalf of the parties and on perusal of the documents placed before this Court, it appears that the petitioner does fulfil the essential eligibility criteria of being a graduate as mentioned in the advertisement.

7.

Vide order dated 15th May, 2026, the authority was directed to reconsider the engagement of the petitioner as she fulfils the essential eligibility qualification and was issued the appointment letter. 8.

It does not appear that the ground for cancellation of the petitioner's appointment is a valid one.

9.

The Court is of the opinion that the cancellation letter issued to the petitioner, which is impugned in the instant writ petition dated 7th April, 2026, cannot be held to be valid in the eye of law. The same stands set aside.

10.

The respondents are directed to take necessary consequential steps in the matter without any further delay.

11.

The writ petition stands disposed of.

12.

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

13.

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

(Amrita Sinha, J.)