Murshed Alam v. The State Of West Bengal And ORS.

Court No. 2 Calcutta High Court In the Circuit Bench at Jalpaiguri Appellate Side WPA 348 of 2025 Murshed Alam Vs.

The State of West Bengal & Ors.

(1490) 07.04.2025 (JPD 24) (S. Banerjee) Mr. Aryak Dutta ... for the petitioner Mr. Hirak Barman Mr. Bikash Singha ... for the State Mr. Amales Ray, Sr. Advocate Ms. Mousumi Bhowal Mr. Nigam Mittal Ms. Prerna Mitra ... for the respondent nos. 3 and 4 The petitioner has challenged a selection process of the year 2010 and has prayed for a direction upon the respondent authorities to prepare a fresh panel.

Mr. Dutta, learned advocate appearing for the petitioner submits that the petitioner submitted a representation praying for furnishing certain information but till date no information has been supplied to the petitioner.

Learned advocate for the District Primary School Council submits that the petitioner approached this Court challenging the selfsame selection process in the year 2011 and the petitioner was unsuccessful in the said writ petition.

Record reveals that the petitioner filed a writ petition being WP 12265(W) of 2011 praying for supply of information under the provisions of 2005 Act and in reply to such query a reply was given on April 6, 2011. The coordinate Bench in the order dated March 2, 2012 passed in WP 12265(W) of 2011 has observed that although the issuance of the appointment letter to the private respondents has been challenged in the writ petition, the petitioner sought the answer script of the private respondent in the writ petition which cannot be given to him. On such observation the writ petition was dismissed.

The petitioner has now approached this Court praying for supply of information by submitting a representation dated September 12, 2024.

The information sought for are in relation to a selection process of the year 2010. If the petitioner wanted such information with regard to the selection process, it was well open to the petitioner

to seek such information at the relevant point of time. Such a belated challenge to the selection process cannot be entertained by this Court.

For such reason, WPA 348 of 2025 stands dismissed without, however, any order as to costs. (Hiranmay Bhattacharyya, J.)