Shubhalika Paul v. The State Of West Bengal And ORS.

IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA

CIRCUIT BENCH AT JALPAIGURI 19.03.2026 Sl. No.20 tkm W. P. A. 420 of 2026 [Shubhalika Paul -Vs- State of West Bengal & Ors.] Mr. Supratick Shyamal Mr. Alokesh Dalai Ms. Smita Sinha Mitra ... ... for the petitioner Mr. Momenur Rahman Mr. Kumar Santanu ... for the State Mr. Sourav Ganguly Mr. Gopal Roy Ms. Rishita Chakraborty ... for respondent no. 2 1.

The affidavit of service is taken on record.

2.

The petitioner has preferred the present petition alleging inaction on the part of the respondent authorities in not considering the petitioner's application dated 1.9.2025 seeking transfer from Dhupguri Circle to Jalpaiguri Sadar East Circle.

3.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner was confirmed as an assistant teacher with effect from 5.8.2012 at Bairatiguri SC Primary School. On 5.8.2017 the petitioner was transferred temporarily to Jalpaiguri Government Girls Primary School of Sadar East Circle. Her pay, allowances, service condition and office of Drawing and Disbursement of salary in the new post will

be same as before.

Accordingly, on 29.08.2017 the petitioner joined in the said school. However, for the purpose of drawing salary, she is required to travel to the mother school situated in Dhupguri Circle. It is submitted that since such transfer was temporary in nature and due to her illness, it is not possible for her to travel to Dhupguri Circle regularly.

4.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner had originally made an application on 12.12.2019 for transfer. Upon receiving no response, she submitted a subsequent applications dated 18.8.2024 and 1.9.2025. The said application has been forwarded by the Sub-Inspector of Schools, Dhupguri Circle, Jalpaiguri to the Chairman of District Primary School Council, Jalpaiguri and the same is still pending.

5.

Learned counsel for the respondent no. 2 submits the competent authority has no objection if the representation submitted by the petitioner is considered and decided in accordance with law.

6.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner shall be satisfied if the

said representation is considered and decided within a time bound manner.

7.

Having considered the submissions advanced by the learned counsel for the parties and without entering into the merit of the claim of the petitioner, the present petition is disposed of by directing the respondent no. 2 to consider petitioner's representation in accordance with law and the relevant rules by passing a reasoned and speaking order within a period of eight weeks from the date of communication of this order.

8.

It is made clear that this court has not expressed any opinion on the merits of the petitioner's claim and all issues are kept open to be decided by the competent authority in accordance with law.

9.

With the above directions, the present writ petition stands disposed of.

(Gaurang Kanth, J.)