Ireen Parveen v. State Of West Bengal And ORS.

IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA

CONSTITUTIONAL WRIT JURISDICTION APPELLATE SIDE 12.08.2025 rkd W.P.A. 14778 of 2025 Ct.18 DM Ireen Parveen -vsState of West Bengal & Ors.

Mr. Debashis Saha, Mr. Sanjoy Ghosh, Mr. Avirup Roy Sanyal, Ms. Sucheta Pal ....for the petitioner.

Dr. Sutanu Kumar Patra, Ms. Supriya Dubey ....for the WBCSSC.

Mr. Gourav Das, Mr. Biman Halder ....for the State.

1.

Affidavit-of-service filed on behalf of the petitioner is taken on record.

2.

Petitioner previously worked as a primary teacher under Uttar Dinajpur District Primary School Council for the period from 2nd March, 2010 to 26th September, 2018.

3.

Petitioner participated in 1st SLST, 2016 for Classes IX & X as well as 1st SLST, 2016 for Classes XI & XII. In both the selection process petitioner was selected. However, petitioner opted to be appointed as Assistant Teacher for Classes XI & XII.

4.

Petitioner joined the post of Assistant Teacher on

27th September, 2018. In 2020 petitioner was transferred to Islampur Girls' High School, Uttar Dinajpur. Petitioner complains of non-payment of salary from the month of April, 2025. Prayer is made to permit the petitioner to function as Assistant Teacher for Classes XI & XII in Islampur Girls' High School, Uttar Dinajpur.

5.

It is rightly pointed out by the learned advocate representing West Bengal Central School Service Commission as well as State respondents that entire selection process i.e. 1st SLST, 2016 for Classes XI & X and XI & XII was set aside by the Hon'ble Supreme Court vide judgment dated 3rd April, 2025 passed in civil appeal arising out of Special Leave Petition (Civil) No.9586 of 2024 [State of West Bengal vs. Baishakhi Bhattacharyya (Chatterjee) and Ors.]. Therefore, it is discernable as to why petitioner is not getting salary from the month of April, 2025.

6.

Petitioner lost job in terms of judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court dated 3rd April, 2025 as the selection process i.e. 1st SLST, 2016 for Classes XI & XII was declared void.

7.

From the case made out in this writ petition inference cannot be drawn that petitioner is untainted candidate. Hence, no relief can be

granted to the petitioner.

8.

The writ petition stands dismissed.

9.

However, there shall be no order as to costs.

10. Urgent photostat certified copy of this order, if applied for, be given to the learned Advocates for the parties on the usual undertakings.

(Saugata Bhattacharyya, J.)