Shukla Sarkar v. State Of West Bengal & ORS

19th March, 2026 In the High Court at Calcutta Item no.D/L 58 Court No. 18 Pradip, A.R.(Ct.) Constitutional Writ Jurisdiction Appellate Side Case No.

WPA 7974 of 2011 (CAN 1 of 2025) (CAN 2 of 2026) In the matter of :

Miss Shukla Sarkar .... Petitioner VS.

State of West Bengal & Ors.

....Respondents The Petitioner in person:

Ms. Shukla Sarkar For the State:

Mr. Asish Kumar Guha Mr. Rajendra Chaturvedi ....Advocates For the Respondent no. 5:

Mr. Purbayan Chakraborty Mr. Chiranjit Pal ....Advocates In Re:- CAN 1 of 2025 & CAN 2 of 2026

1. An application for recalling the order dated 5th February, 2025 has been filed by the petitioner.

2. I have perused the application for restoration and being satisfied with the grounds mentioned in the application recall the order dated 5th February, 2025. Let the writ petition be restored to its original file and number.

3. The application being CAN 1 of 2025 and application for condonation of delay being CAN 2 of 2026 stands disposed of.

In Re:- WPA 7974 of 2011

1. The petitioner appears in-person. She is aggrieved by nonrenewal of her contract.

2. The petitioner was engaged on contractual basis in the post of Counsellor under Dakshin Dinajpur Juvenile Justice Board, Balurghat. The engagement was temporary and liable for termination by a fifteen days' notice from either side.

3. The engagement did not entitle the petitioner to claim herself as regular government employee. The initial engagement was valid for a period of one year from the date of joining subject to renewal from time to time at the discretion of the authority concerned.

4. As per the letter of engagement a monthly consolidated salary of Rs. 6,000/- was payable to her. The service of the petitioner was not renewed after January, 2011. She is aggrieved by the same.

5. It is submitted that there are other counsellors in the Juvenile Justice Board whose services have not been discontinued. The respondent authority conspired to discontinue and deliberately did not renew the contract of the petitioner.

6. Prayer has been made to direct the respondents to renew the contract and extend the tenure of her service.

7. The instant writ petition was filed in the month of May, 2011. The contract of the petitioner expired way back in January, 2011. The engagement was temporary for a fixed period of time. More than a decade has elapsed after the contract of the petitioner expired. At such delayed point of time, the prayer of the petitioner directing the authority to renew her contract, cannot be accepted.

8. In view of the above, no relief can be granted to the petitioner in the instant writ petition. The writ petition fails and is hereby dismissed.

9. Parties to act on the basis of the server copy of this order duly downloaded from the official website of this Court.

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

(Amrita Sinha, J.)