Dipankar Pal v. State Of West Bengal And ORS.
04.12.2025 Court No.18 AGM
IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA
CONSTITUTIONAL WRIT JURISDICTION APPELLATE SIDE WPA 20215 of 2025 Dipankar Pal -versus The State of West Bengal & Ors.
Mr. Sudip Ghosh Chowdhury.
Ms. Shreyeta Mitra.
Ms. Pritha Biswas.
...For the petitioner.
Dr. Sutanu Kumar Patra.
Ms. Supriya Dubey.
... For the WBCSSC.
1.
The petitioner prays for extension of the recommendation letter issued in his favour on 20th November, 2024. The petitioner was to inform the Commission within six weeks about his joining or refusal.
2.
By a communication dated 26th December, 2024 the petitioner sought for extension of the validity period of the recommendation letter for a period of ninety days as he was unable to join within the time period mentioned in the recommendation letter for some family problem and other related issues. 3.
There was no response from the Commission. It has been submitted that as the petitioner approached the Commission within the validity period of the recommendation letter, accordingly, the Commission ought to be directed to consider the same.
4.
The prayer of the petitioner is opposed by the learned advocate representing the Commission. 5.
It has been submitted that the Commission is not obliged to give any reason for not extending the validity period of the recommendation letter. 6.
The recommendation letter expired long back and at such delayed point of time there is hardly any scope to reconsider the same.
7.
It appears that when the recommendation letter was issued, the petitioner was already serving in a school. He lost his job in view of the order passed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court on 3rd April, 2025. 8.
The petitioner has filed the instant writ petition on 26th August, 2025 praying for a direction upon the Commission for extending the validity period of the recommendation letter so that he can join in service.
9.
Admittedly, in the instant case the recommendation letter expired long back. The petitioner did not approach the Court within the validity period of the said letter seeking extension of time. After more than four months of losing the job, the petitioner has approached this Court for relief.
10. Upon hearing the submission made on behalf of the parties and keeping in mind the fact that the petitioner has lost his job and it may be difficult for him to lead a normal life without employment, accordingly, the Court directs the Commission to take a sympathetic view of the matter and consider the prayer of the petitioner for extending the validity period of the recommendation letter, however, subject to availability of matching vacancies.
11. The writ petition stands disposed of.
12. Urgent Photostat certified copy of this order be supplied to the parties, if applied for, as early as possible.
(Amrita Sinha, J.)