Animesh Bandyopadhyay v. State Of West Bengal And ORS.

06.08.2025 Item No.38 BR WPA 20961 of 2022 Animesh Bandyopadhyay -vsState of West Bengal and Others Mr. T.Dutta, Ms. S.Parween ...for the petitioner Mr. Biswabrata Basu Mallick, Ld.AGP, Mr. Sayan Ganguly ... for the State Mr. Raja Saha, Mr. Sanjay Mukherjee, Ms. B. Roy ..... for the respondent no. 6 Mr. Sankar Banerjee, Ms. Jaya Banerjee .... For the Municipality

1. The writ application has been preferred praying for direction upon the respondents to initiate a fresh recruitment process in accordance with law in the said post of Majdoor with regard to the Advertisement No.

1022HM/(Staff) Estd/2017 dated 13.09.2017 and to take steps to cancel the appointment already made in regard to the Advertisement No. 1022HM/(Staff) Estd/2017 dated 13.9.2017.

2. It is the case of the petitioner that he had applied for the post of Mazdoor in the Haringhata Municipality responding to an advertisement dated 13.09.2017.

He appeared for the said examination but did not get call for interview.

3. He filed an application under the RTI Act wherein he was informed that the documents relating to the said recruitment process have been misplaced.

4. During hearing, the municipality and the State have filed their reports in the form of affidavit.

5.The State has filed copies of relevant documents relating to the said recruitment which are part of the records with the State.

6. It appears from the report in the form of affidavit filed by the State being the respondent no. 1, that copies of all the documents relating to the said recruitment have been annexed to the said report .

7.At page 8A of the report is the document by which the post was created under the Haringhata Municipality. At pages 9,10 and 11 are the advertisements for recruitment/employment notices. At page 12 is the copy of the merit list of

candidates who qualified for the said posts as administered including the post of "Mazdoor."

8. It also appears that the petitioner is not a qualified candidate in the merit list. At page 13 is the mark sheet.

9. This Court finds that the petitioner herein is not a qualified candidate and the documents placed before this Court being prima facie in accordance with law, the recruitment process requires no interference by this Court.

10. Writ application having no merit stands dismissed.

11. Urgent Photostat certified copy of this order, if applied for, be given to the learned counsel for the parties on usual undertakings.

( Shampa Dutt (Paul), J. )