Sudipta Sahoo And ORS. v. State Of West Bengal And ORS.

24th Nov., 2025 Item no.D/L 13 Court No. 18 Pradip, A.R.(Ct.) In the High Court at Calcutta Constitutional Writ Jurisdiction Appellate Side Case No.

WPA 22103 of 2025 In the matter of :

Sudipta Sahoo & Ors.

.... Petitioners VS.

The State of West Bengal & Ors.

....Respondents For the Petitioners:

Mr. Ashoke Banerjee, Sr. Adv.

Mr. Yudhisthir Maity ....Advocates For the WBBSE:

Ms. Koyeli Bhattacharyya Mr. Bibek Dutta ....Advocates For the WBCSSC:

Mr. Kalyan Bandopadhyay, Sr. Adv.

Mr. Biswaroop Bhattacharjee Ms. Pramiti Bandopadhyay Mr. Arka Kumar Nag Mr. Rahul Kumar Singh ....Advocates For the State:

Mr. Supriyo Chottopadhyay Mr. Gourav Das ....Advocates

1. The petitioners participated in the 1st SLST-2016. The entire selection process and consequently their appointments stood cancelled by orders of the Court passed from time to time.

2. The petitioners seek repatriation to their earlier position.

3. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in the judgment dated 3rd April, 2025, in Civil Appeal arising out of SLP(C) No. 9586 of 2024 in the matter of State of West Bengal -vs- Baishakhi Bhattacharyya (Chatterjee)

& Ors. clearly laid down that some of the appointed candidates who do not fall within the category of tainted candidates and may have previously worked in different departments of the State and/or autonomous bodies will have the right to apply to their previous departments to continue with their service.

4. Prayer has been made to permit the petitioners to revert to their previous position.

5. According to the Commission, as the name of the petitioners feature in the list of tainted candidates published in the official website of the Commission for public reviewing, accordingly, there is no scope to repatriate the petitioners.

6. On a perusal of paragraph 47 of the aforesaid judgment passed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court it appears that only the untainted candidates can be considered for repatriation. Any candidate whose name features in the list of tainted candidates cannot be permitted repatriation.

7. As the name of the petitioners feature in the tainted list, relief claimed for by the petitioners cannot be allowed.

8. The writ petition fails and is hereby dismissed.

9. Urgent photostat certified copy of this order, if applied for, be supplied to the parties upon compliance of all requisite formalities. (Amrita Sinha, J.)