Sudip Mukherjee v. The State Of West Bengal And ORS

17.03.2026 In The High Court at Calcutta Ct. No. 5 Circuit Bench at Jalpaiguri Sl. No.14 akd W. P. A. 344 of 2026 [Sudip Mukherjee -Vs- The State of West Bengal & Ors.] Mr. Ekramul Bari Sk. Imtiaj Uddin Ms. Rinka Chakraborty ... ... for the petitioner Mr. Sunit Kumar Roy ... for respondent nos.6 & 7 [West Bengal Central School Service Commission] Mr. Nabankur Paul Mr. Pradip Sarkar ... ... for the State 1.

Affidavit-of-service filed in court today is taken on record.

2.

The petitioner has preferred the present writ petition being aggrieved by the alleged inaction on the part of the respondent authorities in not considering the application dated 18.06.2025 submitted by the petitioner seeking interregional transfer on medical and compassionate ground in accordance with the applicable rules.

3.

It is the case of the petitioner that he was appointed as an Assistant Teacher of Biological Science with effect from 19.07.2011 at Uponchowki High School (H.S.) vide Memo dated 12.08.2011. Vide notification dated 27.02.2015 issued in exercise of the powers conferred by Section 17, read with sub-sections (1) and (2) of Section 10B of the West Bengal School Service Commission Act, 1997 and in supersession of the West Bengal School Service Commission (General Transfer) Rules, 2013, the relevant Rules were notified.

4.

Thereafter, on 06.08.2021 the School Education Department, Government of West Bengal issued a notice announcing a web portal named 'UTSASHREE' in order to facilitate transfer policies amongst the teachers and specifically to enable teachers to obtain transfer to a nearer and more convenient location.

5.

As per the same, the petitioner applied for transfer through 'UTSASHREE'

portal vide application dated 11.08.2021. The said application was rejected on the ground that the petitioner did not fall within the 10% of the senior most teachers, who had applied for general transfer under the said Rule.

6.

The petitioner challenged the said order in WPA 396 of 2025, however, vide order dated 24.04.2025, the said writ petition was disposed of on the basis of the submission made on behalf of the petitioner that there had been augmentation in the staff strength of the school.

7.

It is the submission of the petitioner that he resides at a distance of approximately 619 kilometers away from the school and hence, has applied for transfer vide application dated 18.06.2025. No objection to the said application was accorded by the school authority and the same has been forwarded to the District Inspector of Schools (SE), Cooch Behar. However, according to the petitioner, the said application has not yet been considered by the said District Inspector of Schools.

8.

Learned Advocate for the State-respondents submits that the competent authority has no objection in considering

the application of the petitioner dated 18.06.2025 in accordance with law.

9.

In view of the submissions made by the learned Advocate for the State-respondents, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that his client shall be satisfied if the application dated 18.06.2025 is decided in a time bound manner by the competent authority.

10.

Accordingly, this Court directs the District Inspector of Schools (SE), Cooch Behar (respondent no.3) to consider and decide the application of the petitioner dated 18.06.2025 in accordance with law and in terms of the relevant rules, by passing a speaking order within a period of eight weeks from the date of communication of this order after affording an opportunity of personal hearing to the petitioner. 11.

Needless to mention that this Court has not expressed any opinion on the merits of the claim of the petitioner and all issues are left open to be decided by the competent authority in accordance with law.

12.

With the aforesaid directions, the present writ petition is disposed of.

13.

Since no affidavits have been filed by the respondents, the allegations made in the writ petition shall not be deemed to have been admitted.

14.

Let urgent Photostat certified copy of this order, if applied for, be supplied to the parties on usual undertaking. (Gaurang Kanth, J.)