0% found this document useful (0 votes)
49 views68 pagesWP - ST 101 2023 Document
Uploaded by
SYEDA MYSHA ALICopyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as PDF or read online on Scribd
0% found this document useful (0 votes)
49 views68 pagesWP - ST 101 2023 Document
Uploaded by
SYEDA MYSHA ALICopyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as PDF or read online on Scribd
/ 68
Sk. Imtiaj Uddin Chamber: _P-91, Nani Gopal Roy Chowdhury
‘Advocate Avenue, 2* Flor, Kolkata - 700014.
Bar Association Room No. 8 Se
HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Residence: 8A, Elliot Road, Kolkata - 700016
Near Elliot Post Office
2249-268 1(Resi)
9331015890(Mob)
E-mail: [email protected]
Date : 13.07.2023
1. The Ld. Government Pleader,
High Court, Calcutta
2. The Director of Health and Family Welfare,
Government of West Bengal, Swasthya Bhawan,
GN-29, Sector - V, Salt Lake City, Kolkata -
700091.
3. The Special Secretary, Department of Health and
Family Welfare, M.S. Branch, Swasthya
Bhawan, GN-29, Sector- V, Salt Lake City,
Kolkata -700 091.
4, West Bengal Health Recruitment Board, service
through the Chairman and Chief Executive
Officer, office at GN 31, Sector-V, Salt Lake,
Kolkata - 700091.
5. Secretary and Controller of Examinations, West
Bengal Health Recruitment Board, office at GN
31, Salt Lake, Kolkata.700091.
Re.: WPST No. 101 of 2023
Sumodhur Banerjee
.». Petitioner
-Vs.~
The State of West Bengal & Ors.
Respondents
Sir(s),
Enclosed please find herewith a copy of the Writ Petition with all annexures
which will appear before Their Lordships the Hon’ble Justice Debangsu Basak and
the Hon'ble Justice Md. Shabbar Rashidi on 19.07.2023 or soon thereafter as and
when the business of the Hon'ble Court will permit.
Kindly attend at the time of hearing.
Thanking you
Yours faithfully,
Enclo : As above, eo
Adv 7113223, 5:33 PM Case Status : Search by Case Number
Calcutta High Court - Appellate side
2 Appellate side
Case Details.
Case Type. West
Filing Numbsr 0112025, Filing ater 06-07-2023
Registration Number 01/2023 Registration Date: 06-07-2023
‘CNR Number = WECHCA-032599.2023
Case Status
7th July 2033
First Hearing Date
7th July 2023
‘Next Hearing Date
‘Stage of Case IEW MOTION
Coram 26604GHON'BLE JUSTICE DEBANGSU BASAK , HONBLE JUSTICE MD,
SHABBAR RASHIDI
Bench Division Bench.
‘State = West Bengal
District URULIA
udietal ANDAMUS SECTION
Causolist Name. aly List
Potitioner and Advocate
7) SUMODHUR BANERJEE,
Advocate- SK. IMTIAJ UDDIN
Respondent and Advocate
7) STATE OF WEST BENGAL AND ORS,
i Tider Aang TT nda Sostionta)
(Adriane Tease seus <
History of Case Hearing
Gauss Ut cae Business Ov] Heatng | Purpose of
Type ‘s Date Date hearing
HONELE TUSTIGE DEBARSU BASAC, HONGHOSTTE
owiytia [RONBLE TUSTCE DEBANGSY 7-072029)ew mono
Orders
[order “J order Date Order Details
Details
GROUP A (WRIT MATTERS) (1) ;
| Senvces (
Misceianeous (16)
OBJECTION
‘ompliance Date
[Scrutiny Date [OBJECTION ___Te
[06-07-2028 DISTRICT: PURULIA
IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA,
CONSTITUTIONAL WRIT JURISDICTION
{APPELLATE SIDE)
wPs.t.No. JQ4 — of2023
Subject matter relating to:
under Group : or 5 Head: of the
Classification List.
CAUSE TITLE
Sumodhur Banerjee
sesse-ou-Petitioner
- Versus ~
The State of West Bengal & Ors.
He Respondents
Advocate on record:
See Bere tay who
Advocat
C/o. Ekramul Bari,
Advocate
High Court, Calcutta
Bar Association Room No.8
Mobile : 9331015890
E-mail : ¢[email protected] DISTRICT : PURULIA
IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA,
CONSTITUTIONAL WRIT JURISDICTION
(APPELLATE SIDE)
W.P.S.T. NO, of 2023
In the matter of:
Sumodhur Banerjee
eet Petitioner
- Versus —
The State of West Bengal & Ors.
soseRespondents
INDEX
SLNo. Description of the documents Annexure | Pages
1 Writ Petition L- 17
2. Xerox copy of the entire Original! P-1 [}%—13
Application being O.A. No.637 of 2021
with all annexures
3. | Copy of the order dated 22.04.2022 P-2 AG
4. |Xerox copy of the order dated] P3 |e ~56
03.11.2022 and 02.12.2022
3. [Xerox copy of the order dated] P-4 S¥
12.06.2023 i _ iz SHORT LIST OF DATES
2021 : The Original Application being O.A.
No.637 of 2021 was filed before the
West Bengal State Administrative
Tribunal, Salt Lake City, Kolkata.
22.04.2022 : The said Original Application being
O.A. No. 637 of 2021 was taken up for
consideration before the West Bengal
State Administrative Tribunal, Salt
Lake City, Kolkata.
27.02.2023 : The said Original Application being O.A.
No. 59 of 2022 was fixed for hearing
before the West Bengal State
Administrative Tribunal, Salt Lake City,
Kolkata.
03.11.2022
02.12.2022 : ‘The answering respondent failed- to
submit reply and the register of the
Tribunal extended the time for filing the
reply and thereafter again on
01.08.2022 again the matter was taken
by the Learned Tribunal and further
adjournment was granted and matter
has been posted on 21.09.2022.
12.06.2023 7 The answering respondent are taking
adjournment and lastly on 12.06.2023
the learned Tribunal posted the matter
on 06.12.2023 due to paucity of time
and the claim of the petitioner has been
frustrated. SYNOPSIS
‘The Original Application being O.A. No.637 of 2021 was filed
before the West Bengal State Administrative Tribunal, Salt Lake City,
Kolkata and the matter are fixed at such a long intervals that the
matter gets listed for hearing and even on those dates the chances of
disposal of the matter gets deferred on one or the other trifling
grounds and on the prayer of any of the respondents, the matter gets
adjourned, it is practically adjourned for that whole year and as a
result hereof, the petitioner is being deprived of his right to get speedy
and effective justice, and by which their fundamental rights as well as
their Constitutional and legal rights are being seriously and grossly
affected.
Hence, this Writ Petition. 2021
22.04.2022
27.02.2023
03.11.2022
02.12.2022
12.06.2023
LIST OF DATES
The Original Application being O.A,
No.637 of 2021 was filed before the
West Bengal State Administrative
Tribunal, Salt Lake City, Kolkata,
‘The said Original Application being
O.A. No. 637 of 2021 was taken up for
consideration before the West Bengal
State Administrative Tribunal, Salt
Lake City, Kolkata.
‘The said Original Application being O.A.
No. 59 of 2022 was fixed for hearing
before the West Bengal State
Administrative Tribunal, Salt Lake City,
Kolkata.
The answering respondent failed to
submit reply and the register of the
‘Tribunal extended the time for filing the
reply and thereafter again on
01.08.2022 again the matter was taken
by the Learned Tribunal and further
adjournment was granted and matter
has been posted on 21.09.2022.
The answering respondent are taking
adjournment and lastly on 12.06.2023
the Jearned Tribunal posted the matter
‘on 06.12.2023 due to paucity of time
and the claim of the petitioner has been
frustrated. I.
POINTS OF LAW
Whether time and again the answering respondent are taking
adjournment and lastly on 12.06.2023 the learned Tribunal
posted the matter on 06.12.2023 due to paucity of time and the
claim of the petitioner has been frustrated.
Whether in the Learned Tribunal the case of the petitioner is
getting lingered excessively, unjustifiably and inequitably on one
, or the other excuses to the utter frustration on the basis
purpose and objective of the Administrative Tribunal Act, 1985.
Whether the dates in the said case are fixed at such a long
intervals that the matter gets listed for hearing and even on
those dates the chances of disposal of the matter gets deferred
on one or the other trifling grounds and on the prayer of any of
the respondents, the matter gets adjourned, it is practically
adjourned for that whole year and as a result hereof, the
petitioner is being deprived of his right to get speedy and
effective justice, and by which their fundamental rights as well
as their Constitutional and legal rights are being seriously and
grossly affected. ~Therough
Se soi ea
DISTRICT: PURULIA
IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA
CONSTITUTIONAL WRIT JURISDICTION
(APPELLATE SIDE)
W.P.S.T. NO. of 2023
In the matter of:
An Application under Article 226
of the Constitution of India.
-AND -
In the matter of:
Sumodhur Banerjee, son of
Goutam Banerjee of Cooks
SPOS EEE ECE Ee EEE PrP eran eee — Compound, P.O. Dulmi Nadiha,
District ~ Purulia, Pin - 723102.
Petitioner
-Versus-
1. The State of West Bengal,
through the Secretary,
Department of Health and Family
Welfare, Government of West
Bengal, Swasthya Bhawan, GN-
29, Sector ~ V, Salt Lake City,
Kolkata - 700091. 2. The Director of Health and
Family Welfare, Government of
West Bengal, Swasthya Bhawan,
GN-29, Sector — V, Salt Lake City,
Kolkata — 700091.
3. The Special Secretary,
Department of Health and Family
Welfare, M.S. Branch, Swasthya
Bhawan, GN-29, Sector- V, Salt
Lake City, Kolkata -700 091,
4. West Bengal Health
Recruitment Board, _service
through the Chairman and Chief
Executive Officer, office at GN 31,
Sector-V, Salt Lake, Kolkata -
700091.
5. Secretary and Controller of
Examinations, West Bengal
Health Recruitment Board, office
at GN 31, Salt Lake, Kolkata
700091.
....Respondents. To
The Hon'ble T.S. Sivagnanam, Chief Justice and His Companion
Justices of The said Hon’ble Court;
‘The humble petition of the
petitioner above named most
respectfully:
SHEWETH:
1. That your petitioner is a citizen of India and permanently
resides at the place mentioned in the cause title of this petition.
2, That your petitioner states that the petitioner filed an
application under Section 19 of the Administrative Tribunal Act, 1985
before the Learned Tribunal praying for following relief :~
a) An order directing the respondents, their agents, subordinates
and successors, to appoint the applicant as Inspector of Drug in
connection with the advertisement no. R/Insp:D/37(1)/2016
dated 22.02.2016 in terms of the order and judgment delivered
by the Hon’ble Court in WPST 120 of 2018.
b) An order directing the respondents, their agents, subordinates
and successors to produce all records and proceedings so that d)
3.
conscionable justice may be administered by granting the relief
for hereinabove;
To pass such other or further orders or orders as to the Hon’ble
‘Tribunal may deem fit and proper;
An order do issue directing the respondents, their agents,
subordinates and successors to keep one post of Drug inspector
vacant till the disposal of the application;
‘That. the case made out in Original Application being ©.A.
No.637 of 2021 runs as follows:-
a)
b)
Your applicant states that after obtaining the Bachelor Degree
in Pharmacy completed the Master Degree in the respective
subject of Pharmacy and since completion of his respective
degrees he was working in the specific field of drug
manufacturing and/ or testing and your petitioner have more
than five years experience in the field.
Your applicant states that, the respondent no. 4 herein
published an advertisement being No.R/Insp.D/37(1)/2016
dated 22.02.2016 inviting application for recruitment to the
posts of Inspector of Drugs under Directorate of Drugs Control
under Government of West Bengal. c) Your applicant states that, as per the said advertisement the
essential qualifications needed are quoted herein below:
A. Essential :
i) A Degree in Pharmacy or Pharmaceutical Chemistry or Medicine
with specialization in Clinical Pharmacology or Microbiology
from a University established in India by Law and
ii) Experience of Work in recognized institutions in the
manufacture or testing of drugs or enforcement of the
provisions of the Drugs and Cosmetics Act, 1940 (23 of 1940)
for a minimum total period of five years :
Provided that the specialization in Clinical Pharmacology or
Microbiology shall -have to be certified by the Dean of the .
Faculty of Medicine of the concerned University and the
experience in the manufacture of drugs or experience in the
‘Testing of Drugs or experience in the enforcement of the
provisions of the Drugs and Cosmetics Act, 1940 (23 of 1940);
for a minimum total period of five years has to be certified by
the Head of the recognized Institution wherefrom the said
experience was obtained.”
d) Your applicant states that, since the applicant have the said
essential qualifications in response to the above referred hy
advertisement the applicant participated in the aforesaid
recruitment process and his registration nos. 374494.
Your applicant states that, after verification founding eligible he
was called for interview for the said recruitment process.
Your applicant states that, after interview was over on or about
1 2.05.2017 he is waiting for the result for said recruitment, but
till date no disclosure of the result was made.
That some candidates who participated in the selection process
moved an original application before the Hon’ble Tribunal with
a prayer inter alia for passing an appropriate order or direction
commanding the respondents and each of them and/or their
competent authorities to publish the result of all participated
candidates upon preparing and/or adjudging their merit in an
appropriate, suitable and rotational method of marks
distribution and the said OA was dismissed on merit by an
order dated 27.09.2018 and challenging the decision of the
Learned Tribunal, appropriate application was filed before the
Hon ble High Court and the said writ application was disposed
of by an order dated 28.01.2020.
After issuance of the said advertisement and prior to conduct
the process of selection, the board took a decision to assess the
job aspirants on the basis of additional experience (10 marks) d
k)
)
and working experience in Government sector (5 marks) in
addition to assessing candidature on the basis of academic
qualification (40 marks), experience (30 marks) and interview
(15 marks) and allotting marks to each candidate out of total
100 marks instead of 85 marks.
That distribution of marks in the manner decided by West
Bengal Health Recruitment Board’ in its 96 meeting amounted
to change in the rules in the instant recruitment process.
‘That a writ petition which was moved before the Hon’ble High
court being W.P.S.T. 120 of 2018 wherein the Hon’ble High
Court passed an order dated 28.01.2020 directing the State
Government to appoint the applicant as ‘Inspector of Drugs’
considering the marks for additional experience (10 marks) and
marks for Government experience (5 marks) are incorrect.
‘That applicant’s case stands in the same footing Although, he
was in the eligible list but due to change of rules as decided by
the board in its 96" meeting, applicant could not come to the
zone of consideration. That the applicant came to know from
reliable source that, he secured more marks than the writ
applicant viz. Avijit Das, Suman Goswami and Bhaskar Das.
‘That the applicant made representation before the respondent
to consider his case in the light of the Judgment/ order dated 28.01.2020 passed but the Hon’ble Court, but till date no
action has been taken by the respondent. That the prayer of the
applicant has been kept unattended and thus respondents
acted in deviation of the principle of natural justice.
‘That the applicant is entitled to be appointed as inspector of
Drugs being a successful candidate and as his case stands at
same footing,
‘That Due to COVID-19 pandemic situation, the applicant could
not approach in time and such delay in approaching the
Learned Tribunal ventilating his grievance be condoned for the
interest of justice.
Xerox copy of the entire Original Application being O.A. No.637
of 2021 with all annexures is annexed herewith and marked as
Annexure “P-1",
4.
‘That the original application was filed within statutory time and
‘on 22.04.2022 the Original Application was admitted and direction for
filing reply and rejoinder was passed and matter was directed to be
listed on the next date of hearing.
Copy of the order dated 22.04.2022 is annexed herewith and
marked as Annexure “P-2”. 5. That on 29.06.2022 the answering respondent failed to submit
reply and the register of the Tribunal extended the time for filing the
reply and thereafter again on 01.08.2022 again the matter was taken
by the Learned Tribunal and further adjournment was granted and
matter has been posted on 21.09.2022.
+ 08.9092
oh ope 2022.
Xerox copy of the order dated 08. bt.202% and 02.12.2022 are
x
annexed herewith and marked as Annexure “P-3”.
6. That time and again the answering respondent are taking
adjournment and lastly on 12.06.2023 the learned Tribunal posted
the matter on 06.12.2023 due to paucity of time and the claim of the
petitioner has been frustrated.
Xerox copy of the order dated 12.06.2023 is annexed hereto and
marked as Annexure P-4.
7. ‘That in the Learned Tribunal the case of the petitioner is getting
lingered excessively, unjustifiably and inequitably on one or the other
excuses to the utter frustration on the basis purpose and objective of
the Administrative Tribunal Act, 1985.
8. That the dates in the said case are fixed at such a long intervals
Ural the imatler gets listed for hearing and even on those dates the
chances of disposal of the matter gets deferred on one or the other 10
trifling grounds and on the prayer of any of the respondents, the
matter gets adjourned, it is practically adjourned for that whole year
and as a result hereof, the petitioner is being deprived of his right to
get speedy and effective justice, and by which their fundamental rights
as well as their Constitutional and legal rights are being seriously and
grossly affected.
9. That your petitioner states that the said Original Application
being 0.A. No. 637 of 2021 has been fixed for hearing on 12.06.2023
after the long interval although long interval have already been
elapsed from the date of filing of the said Original Application being
O.A. No. 637 of 2021.
10. That the Tribunal in the facts and circumstances of the case,
ought to have fixed up the date of hearing expeditiotisly for effective
adjudication of the same otherwise the petitioner will be denied of
justice for no fault of its own and will be scriously prejudiced.
11, That your petitioner states that due to fixation of the matter
being 0.A. No. 637 of 2021 in the long gap the petitioner is suffering
mentally a lot as such the Learned Bench of the Administrative
‘Tribunal ought to fix up the matter on an urgent basis but the Leaned
Tribunal without considering said aspect has been pleased to fix the
matter in the month of December which is denial of justice. tL
in
12. That unless this Hon’ble Court will be pleased to direct the
Learned Tribunal to dispose of the Original Application being O.A.
No.637 of 2021 expeditiously by modifying the Order dated
12.06.2023 passed by the Learned Tribunal, your Petitioner will suffer
irreparable loss and injury which cannot be compensated in any
manner whatsoever.
13, That being aggrieved by and dissatisfied with the impugned
Order dated 12.06.2023 passed by the Learned Administrative
Tribunal in respect of fixing the matter for hearing in the long gap and
to fix up the matter being 0.A. No.637 of 2021 for expeditious hearing,
your petitioner beg to move this writ petition under Article 226 of the
Constitution of India in this Hon'ble Court on the following amongst
other:-
GROUNDS
For that the original application was filed within statutory time and
on 22.04.2022 the Original Application was admitted and direction
for filing reply and rejoinder was passed and matter was directed to
be listed on the next date of hearing.
For that on 29.06.2022 the answering respondent failed to submit
reply and the register of the Tribunal extended the time for filing it.
WV.
12
the reply and thereafter again on 01.08.2022 again the matter was
taken by the Learned Tribunal and further adjournment was
granted and matter has been posted on 21.09.2022.
For that time and again the answering respondent are taking
adjournment and lastly on 12.06.2028 the learned Tribunal posted
the matter on 06.12.2023 due to paucity of time and the claim of
the petitioner has been frustrated.
For that in the Learned Tribunal the case of the petitioner is getting
lingered excessively, unjustifiably and inequitably on one or the
other excuses to the utter frustration on the basis purpose and
objective of the Administrative Tribunal Act, 1985.
’For that the dates in the said case are fixed at such a long intervals
that the matter gets listed for hearing and even on those dates the
chances of disposal of the matter gets deferred on one or the other
trifling grounds and on the prayer of any of the respondents, the
matter gets adjourned, it is practically adjourned for that whole
year and as a result hereof, the petitioner is being deprived of his
right to get speedy and effective justice, and by which their
fundamental rights as well as their Constitutional and legal rights
are being seriously and grossly affected. Vi.
Vit.
vol.
Ix.
13
For that the said Original Application being 0.A, No. 637 of 2021
has been fixed for hearing on 12.06.2023 after the long interval
although long interval have already been elapsed from the date of
filing of the said Original Application being 0.A. No. 637 of 2021.
For that the Tribunal in the facts and circumstances of the case,
ought to have fixed up the date of hearing expeditiously for effective
adjudication of the same otherwise the petitioner will be denied of
justice for no fault of its own and will be seriously prejudiced.
For that due to fixation of the matter being 0.A. No. 637 of 2021 in
the long gap the petitioner is suffering mentally a lot as such the
Learned Bench of the Administrative Tribunal ought to fix up the
matter on an urgent basis but the Leaned Tribunal without
considering said aspect has been pleased to fix the matter in the
month of December which is denial of justice.
For that unless this Hon’ble Court will be pleased to direct the
Learned Tribunal to dispose of the Original Application being 0.A.
No.637 of 2021 expeditiously by modifying the Order dated 4
12.06.2023 passed by the Learned Tribunal, your Petitioner will
suffer irreparable loss and injury which cannot be compensated in
any manner whatsoever.
14. That there is no other alternative legal efficacious and speedy
remedy than to move a writ application under Article 226 of the
Constitution of India and seek appropriate relief, The remedy sought
for if granted would be full adequate and complete.
15. There are no latches on the part of the petitioner in moving the
instant petition and the balance of convenience and/or
inconveniences is in favour of passing of the order, as prayed for
herein by the petitioner.
16. That the petitioner made representations before the concerned
authority and that representation should be taken as demand for
justice and further making demand for justice would be nothing but
an empty formality.
17. That the record of this case is lying within the jurisdiction of
this Hon’ble Court. 15
18. That no such writ application was moved before this Hon’ble
Court in the self same cause of action.
19. That this application is made bonafide and for the ends of
justice.
In the circumstances, your petitioner
humbly pray that your Lordships would
graciously be pleased to pass the
following orders:
a) A writ of or in the nature of
Mandamus do issue directing the
tribunal without_— giving any
unnecessary adjournment by modifying
the order dated 12.06.2023 and to
dispose of the Original Application
within a specific time period which the
Hon’ble Court may deem fit and proper.
b) A _writ of or in the nature of
Certiorari do issue calling upon the
respondents and each of them to certify
and transmit to this court the original
records of the case before this Hon’ble 16
Court so that conscionable justice may
rendered.
<) A writ of or in the nature of
Prohibition do issue prohibiting upon
the respondents and each of them
either by themselves or through their
men, agents, assigns, subordinates
from exercising further not warranted
under the statute.
qd) Rule of N IS I in terms of
prayers (a) to (c) as above;
e) If no cause or insufficient causes
are shown Rule be made absolute;
) Ad interim order of injunction
restraining the Learned ‘Tribunal to give
unnecessary adjournment by modifying
the order dated 12.06.2023 till the
disposal of the writ petition.
hy And pass such other further
order or orders as to Your Lordship
may seems fit and proper.
And your petitioner, as in duty bound, shall ever pray. g. 13%... years, by faith — Hindu, by occupation — Saami.e&e
17
AFFIDAVIT
I, Sumodhur Banerjee, son of Goutam Banerjee, aged about
., residing
at Cooks Compound, P.O, Dulmi Nadiha, District - Purulia, Pin —
723102, do hereby solemnly affirm and say as follows: -
1, That I am the petitioner in the instant writ application and I am
well acquainted with the facts and circumstances of the case and I am
competent to affirm this affidavit.
2. That the statement made in paragraphs 5 — § are true to
my knowledge and rest are my humble submissions before this
Hon'ble Court.
Semncthy [ane je
Prepared in my office The deponent is known tome.
&. pay Udder SAhs
oo Marwan
te F16enn Clerk to: -
Solemnly affirmed before me on Advocate
this the 44 (kday of July, 2023.
Commissioner.
1 certify all annexure are legible
ivocate
Taney dich
Nv yo
i)
IN THE WEST BENGAL STATE ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL
BIKASH BHAWAN, SALT LAKE CITY, KOLKATA - 700 091,
An application under section 19 of the Administrative
‘Tribunal Act, 1985,
O. A. No. OF 2021;
In the matter
of:
Sumodhur Banerjee
-Versus-
-Applicant
‘The State of West Bengal & Ors.
od
.». Respondents
INDEX
SLNo Particulars of documents Annexure Pages
1. | Original Application. 1to 1S
2. |Photocopy of the said advertisement “a le -lg
dated 22.02.2016
3. | Photocopies of application form “B* 14
4, | Photocopies of their interview call letters “Cc” 22 |
5. | Xerox copy of the order is annexed hereto “D* Q\-2%
28.01.2020
6. | Xerox copy of the representation made by “E” 2-23
the petitioner ae
Dated:- 2021
Sumecthy ponaje
Place:- Caleutta Signature of the Applicant
(For use of the Tribunal’s office only)
Date of Filing:-
Date of Registration:~
OR
Registration Nos.
Registrar,
State Administrative Tribunal
West Bengal. 4
IN THE WEST BENGAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL,
Bikash Bhavan, Salt Li it -700.091
An Application under section 19 of the Administrative
‘Tribunal Act, 1985,
Details of the application: Original Application No. of 2021
1. Particular of the Applicant:
Sumodhur Banerjee, son of Goutam
alot BS
Banerjee, of Cooks Compound, P.O.
Dulmi Nadiha, District ~ Purulia, Pin —
723102.
2. — Particular of the Respondents:
1, The State of West Bengal,
through the Secretary, Department of
Health _ and = Family — Welfare,
Government of West Bengal, Swasthya
Bhawan, GN-29, Sector — V, Salt Lake
City, Kolkata - 700091.
2. The Director of Health and
Family Welfare, Government of West
Bengal, Swasthya Bhawan; GN-29,
Seamoalhyy rv 20
Sector - V, Salt Lake City, Kolkata ~
‘700091.
3. The Special Secretary,
Department of Health and Family
Welfare, M.S. Branch, Swasthya
Bhawan, GN-29, Sector- V, Salt Lake
City, Kolkata -700 091.
4. West Bengal Health Recruitment
Board, service through the Chairman
and Chief Executive Officer, office at
GN 31, Sector-V, Salt Lake, Kolkata -
700091
5. Secretary and Controller of
Examinations, West Bengal Health
Recruitment Board, office at GN 31,
Salt Lake, Kolkata . 700091.
3. PARTICULARS OF THE ORDER AGAINST WHICH THE
APPLICATION IS MADE:
‘The application is not against any order but against the
purported method of marks distribution pattern adopted by the
Swoaslhy thew 2)
Respondent authorities concerned, more particularly by the
respondent nos. 4 and 5, for adjudging the merit of the candidates
for selection to the posts of Inspector of drugs under Directorate of
Drugs Control pursuant to the Advertisement No.
R/Insp.D/37(1)/2016 dated 08.03.2021 of the applicant has not
been considered by the respondent no.4 & 5. Such action is
contrary to, the law, discriminatory and violates Articles 14 and 16
of the Constitution of India,
4, LIMITATION:
‘That the application has been preferred within the period of
limitation as prescribed under section 21 of the Administrative
‘Tribunal Act.
5. JURISDICTION OF THE HON’BLE TRIBUNAL:
‘That the subject matter of the instant application falls within
the jurisdiction of the Hon’ble Tribunal.
6 FACTS OF THE CASE:
a) That the applicant is the law-abiding citizen of India and
residing at the address given in the cause title.
Sameday Monaje. »)
d)
7-2 daa
Your applicant states that he after obtaining the Bachelor
Degree in Pharmacy completed the Master Degree in the
respective subject of Pharmacy. Your applicant craves leave to
refer to the academic qualifications of the applicant at the
time of hearing of this application.
Your applicant states that since completion of their respective
degrees they are working in the specific field of drug
manufacturing and/ or testing respectively and having more
than five years experience in the field.
Your applicant states that, the respondent no. 4 herein
published an advertisement being No.R/Insp.D/37(1}/2016
dated 22.02.2016 inviting application for recruitment to the
posts of Inspector of Drugs under Directorate of Drugs
Control under Government of West Bengal.
Photocopy of the said advertisement dated 22.02.2016 is
annexed hereto and marked as Annexure “A”.
Your applicant states that, as per the said advertisement the
essential qualifications needed are quoted herein below:
A. Essential :
Swmaalhy osnegjer i)
ii)
23 &
A Degree in Pharmacy or Pharmaceutical Chemistry or
Medicine with specialization in Clinical Pharmacology or
Microbiology from a University established’ in India by Law
and
Experience of Work in recognized institutions in the
manufacture or testing of drugs or enforcement of the
provisions of the Drugs and Cosmetics Act, 1940 (23 of 1940)
for a minimum total period of five years :
Provided that the specialization in Clinical Pharmacology or
Microbiology shall .have to be certified by the Dean of the.
Faculty of Medicine of the concerned University and the
experience in the manufacture of drugs or experience in the
Testing of Drugs or experience in the enforcement of the
provisions of the Drugs and Cosmetics Act, 1940 (23 of
1940); for a minimum total period of five years has to be
certified by the Head of the recognized Institution wherefrom.
the said experience was obtained."
Your applicant states that, since the applicant have the said
essential qualifications in response to the above referred
advertisement the applicant participated in the aforesaid
recruitment process and his registration _nos.
IRAANS
Shesvacdhay ibenayjes 8)
h)
ae
Photocopies of application form are annexed hereto and
collectively marked as Annexure “B”.
Your applicant states that, after verification founding eligible
Re vaso ;
they were called for interview for the said recruitment
process,
Photocopy of the interview call letter is annexed hereto and
marked as Annexure “C*.
Your applicant states that, after interview was over on or
about 1 2.05.2017 he is waiting for the result for said
recruitment, but till date no disclosure of the result was
made.
That some candidates who participated in the selection
process moved an original application before the Hon'ble
‘Tribunal with a prayer inter alia for passing an appropriate
order or direction commanding the respondents and each of
them and/or their competent authorities to publish the
result of all participated candidates upon preparing and/or
adjudging their merit in an appropriate, suitable and
rotational method of marks distribution and the said OA was
dismissed on merit by an order dated 27.09.2018 and
challenging the decision of the Learned Tribunal, appropriate 25
application was filed before the Hon'ble High Court and the
said writ application was disposed of by an. order dated
28.01.2020 with following direction : -
We, therefore, hold that the tribunal was not justified in
rejecting the claims of the applicant 1, 3 and 4.
The State Government is directed to appoint the applicant 1,
3 and 4 as inspector of drugs immediately but not later than
a fortnight from date of receipt of a copy of this order.
‘The dates of appointment of the applicant 1, 3 and 4 shall
relate back to the date on which candidates in the merit list,
who secured marks equal to or lesser than the applicant 1, 3
and 4, came to be appointed. Such applicant shall not be
entitled to any arrears of financial benefits but benefits shall
flow to them on and from the dates of appointment. However,
the period during which the applicant 1, 3 and 4 could not
discharge duty as inspectors of drugs shall be counted for the
purpose of calculating their qualifying service for pension and
other benefits, which would have accrued to them but for the
delayed appointments. Insofar as seniority in service is
concerned, however, they shall rank below the candidates
already appointed.
Se
why Pras aces i)
26
Be it placed on record that we have resisted ourselves from
interfering with the selection process as a whole since the
private respondents have already been appointed and working
as inspectors of drugs for quite some time, and also that
‘because there are vacancies where the applicant 1, 3 and 4
can be accommodated.
List the writ petition on 11t February, 2020 for consideration
of the claims of the applicant 2 and 5. It is made clear that
similar relief granted to the applicant 1, 3 and 4 may be
extended to the applicant 2 and 5, should they succeed in
their claim that they had requisite experience and were thus
eligible for consideration of their candidature.
Xerox copy of the order is annexed hereto 28.01.2020 is
annexed herewith and marked as Annexure “D”.
After issuance of the said advertisement and prior to conduct
the process of selection, the board took a decision to assess
the job aspirants on the basis of additional experience (10
marks) and working experience in Government sector (5
marks) in addition to assessing candidature on the basis of
academic qualification (40 marks), experience (30 marks) and
interview (15 marks) and allotting marks to each candidate
out of total 100 marks instead of 85 marks.
Sol! hg fou, )
d
2F
That distribution of marks in the manner decided by West
Bengal Health Recruitment Board’ in its 96 meeting
amounted to change in the rules in the instant recruitment
process,
That a writ petition which was moved before the Honorable
High court being W.P.S.T. 120 of 2018 wherein the
Honorable High Court passed an order dated 28,01.2020
directing the State Government to appoint the applicant as
‘Inspector of Drugs’ considering the marks for additional
experience (10 marks) and marks for Government experience
(5 marks) are incorrect.
That applicant's case stands in the same footing Although,
he was in the eligible list but due to change of rules as
decided by the board in its 96" meeting, applicant could not
come to the zone of consideration. That the applicant came
to know from reliable source that, he secured more marks
than the writ applicant viz. Avijit Das, Suman Goswami and
Bhaskar Das.
That the applicant made representation before the
respondent to consider his case in the light of the
Judgment/ order dated 28.01.2020 passed but the Hon'ble
Court, but till date no action has been taken by the
Sue volley Rane 9)
P)
L
ie
28 *
10
respondent. That the prayer of the applicant has been kept
unattended and thus respondents acted in deviation of the
principle of natural justice.
Xerox copy of the representation made by the applicant is
annexed herewith and marked as Annexure “E”.
‘That the applicant is entitled to be appointed as inspector of
Drugs being a successful candidate and as his case
stands at same footing.
That Due to COVID-19 pandemic situation, the applicant
could not approach in time and such delay in approaching
the Learned Tribunal ventilating his grievance be condoned
for the interest of justice.
Grounds with legal provisions:
For that there is no rationality in distribution of marks and the
allocation of 45 marks out of 100 for experience is excessive,
illegal, arbitrary and there is no rationality in distribution of
marks for experience since experience cannot substitute merit.
For that the applicant states that since in the rules framed by
the Government of West Bengal as well as in the rules framed by
the Central Government there is no indication that higher
Srrwclhy Bonner mn.
Vi.
27
n
experience is a qualification, the method of distribution of
marks of 45 out of 100 is illegal, arbitrary, unreasonable and
cannot be sustained both from the points of law as well as from
the points of facts.
For that under Rule 49 of the Drugs and Cosmetics Rules 1945
there is no indication that greater weightage should be given to
experience of more than 5 years,
That the Hon’ble Court by the order 28.01.2020 has already
Aves
decided the issue and the applicant is entitled to #& similar
relief as he is situated in the similar and identical
circumstances.
For that after issuance of the said advertisement and prior to
conduct the process of selection, the board took a decision to
assess the job aspirants on the basis of additional experience
(10 marks) and working experience in Government sector (5
marks) in addition to assessing candidature on the basis of
academic qualification (40 marks), experience (30 marks) and
interview (15 marks) and allotting marks to each candidate out
of total 100 marks instead of 85 marks.
For that distribution of marks in the manner decided by West
Bengal Health Recruitment Board’ in its 96 meeting amounted
to change in the rules in the instant recruitment process.
Sramealhy foasrarjer vu.
Vill.
Zo
12
For that That a writ petition which was moved before the
Honorable High court being W.P.S.T. 120 of 2018 wherein the
Honorable High Court passed an order dated 28.01.2020
directing the State Government to appoint the applicant as
‘Inspector of Drugs’ considering the marks for additional
experience (10 marks) and marks for Government experience (5
marks) are incorrect.
For that applicant’s case stands in the same footing Although,
he was in the eligible list but due to change of rules as decided
by the board in its 96" meeting, applicant could not come to the
zone of consideration. That the applicant came to know from
reliable source that, he secured more marks than the writ
applicant viz. Avijit Das, Suman Goswami and Bhaskar Das.
For that the applicant made representation before the
respondent to consider his case in the light of the Judgment/
order dated 28.01.2020 passed but the Hon’ble Court, but till
date no action has been taken by the respondent. That the
prayer of the applicant has been kept unattended and thus
respondents acted in deviation of the principle of natural
justice.
For that the applicant is entitled to be appointed as inspector of
Drugs being a successful candidate and as his case stands at
same footing.
Sree ny boavajes 10.
2) &
Matters previously not _and/ or pending before any other
13
Hon’ble Court or Tribunal:
‘That the applicant has not preferred any other application on
the self same facts or cause of action before any other Hon’ble
Court or Tribunal nor any such application is pending.
Details of the Remedies Exhausted:
That your applicant states that the applicant has made
several verbal as well as written representations before the
respondents, but nothing has been done by the respondents
till date for redressal of the genuine grievance of your
applicant.
‘That a purported decision have been passed by the
respondents and against the same your applicant has no
other alternative remedy, but to prefer the instant application.
Relief Sought For:
An order directing the respondents, their agents,
subordinates and successors, to appoint the applicant as
Inspector of Drug in connection with the advertisement no.
R/Insp.D/37(1)/2016 dated 22.02.2016 in terms of the order
Srewoaltoy Boawafes b)
11.
12.
Z2—
and judgment delivered by the Hon’ble Court in WPST 120 of
2018.
An order directing the respondents, their agents,
subordinates and successors to produce all records and
proceedings so that conscionable justice may be administered
by granting the relief for hereinabove;
To pass such other or further orders or orders as to the
Hon’ble Tribunal may deem fit and proper;
Interim Order, If Ar ed For:
Pending disposal of the main application, the applicant prays
for following interim orders:
An order do issue directing the respondents, their agents,
subordinates and successors to keep one post of Drug
inspector vacant till the disposal of the application;
Enclosures:
Annexure “A” to “E”.
soll fon. 22
15
VERIFICATION
I, Sumodhur Banerjee, son of Goutam Banerjee, aged about 35.
years, by faith-Hindu, by occupation- Service, residing at Cooks
Compound, P.O. Dulmi Nadiha, District - Purutia, Pin - 723102, do
hereby solemnly affirm and say that I being applicant of the instant
application to verify this application and I verify that the contents
of paragraph nos. 1to _are true to my knowledge and belief and
rests are my respectful submission before this Hon'ble Tribunal
and I have not suppressed any material fact:
Place : Kolkata
Date: 31.08.2023. Ss
amet Rann
aja
Signature of the Applicant
Identified by me
Advocate.
To
The Registrar
West Bengal State Administrative Tribunal
Salt Lake City, Calcutta. West Bengal 1igaith Recruitment Board
BENFISH TOWER ( 2 & 2" Floor}
GN31, Sector, de take, Kolkata ~ 700091
pwbhrbin
Ad No i ap.0/BMBVIOIS
Recrultment to tha post of Inspoctoiiéy prugs under Directorate of Drugs control
‘rane appbatons or riled fem lncan Cizen sian ober nao. 28 dace elghia by Govemant ole
eds taveen 25.2 20160 09.03:2016 {halo BPM):
Tareas ne andnecaseary pases inte towns pxmarphs
‘Acandidate should very from the nated ndes natrne is igi The coon prescribed: cannot be relaxed, The
tenia be made by sleston but her a gibir fppeatees ae race, a8 a asutof Abeta,
‘ha Board may forthe purpose of short sng hold ph paaminaton, H
‘Seale of Pay: Rs. 15500 — Rs. 42000! { Grade Ba Rs. 5400+). Other allowances ‘ill also be admissible 33 per
Cerrar ein ea, ‘ "
Antcpated Vacances
Taz Post | Unrssared
{lispedaeof rae [48
BE Gategoy [PHO [ Tout
é a8
aE CaegenyA
leno
sie)
rs
‘uaitcaton:
A asa: 3
a A Degree In Pharmacy.or Phagnacevilcal Chemistry or Medielne wih: specialization In Cinical
Pamacsiony or Mba fg Ulesty sahshedln aby Law and
B—_Expetenca of workin tudo in the ranula testing of gs or enoremeat
the pons of he Dn Cosme 04 ff} re man pdt
yeas
Provided thatthe Gj Ciked Pramaccogy or Nkzobidony shat have toi ented
by the Dean of to Facity sfledcne ofthe concemed Unlversty ad the expetenes inthe
manufac of gs or epee nthe Testeg of ngs ar expesance athe enoesar of is
‘rovers of to Orgs and Cites Ac, 940 (23 of 1940) fora mini ll pete We
Year has tobe cried yg} a ecogrizes etuion wre sal extoce
‘was bane.
‘Scanned with CamScanner
of Orgs contol, Heath & Fane Deptt; - ee
nat may ban 38 Yet 380% Jarry 201 age boa sre cnt perversely
Jat: NAcooommet sonic cha pone nee aed
deals aa roa 8 ye be £6 ST nga ye nk 3 Ye er OBC ana We ng
‘septs year sr ars hoa pyaar at om
ote:
1) Tgpteant muse zen logan lpn let anally a dere aby Covenant
at
2) ge As cated Nahar ea aw cD see
83) The chaln of candidates for relaxation of Seas 4 permanent Cov, employee should bs'ptoved by &
cartileate from the appointing author hoving te pelod of hl her continuous service under
‘Government «f Wes! Bengal,
‘Fea: Canales rst subst he eppleatn foo among io RE. 210 (Rupoos two hundked ton) tough, are
‘curr a any rene of Bane parting In the GRBs ( Govt. Race Portal System }, Govt ot Wost Banga uch
Speman seni arene Frm, Gav. Roca Head of cours “0058-00104.
aon.
Ieny pleat be noted that aftr paymont te Dank; Gundlatos have t lg Int the webstt:with the fog inID &
Password lead provided to thom alter esltatit ough SMSF Einall fr payentvartéatin and fed up
festpartn ofthe applcalion form,
sont i aka, a ei
‘No appcaton wll be considered nla accompanied wi he aque application ie. exrapag Candies beige to
SOIT exagty.of West Bengal and persona wih tallies sped indir deabes rl, 1009 (atcale-cisned
tele te Averzement dle) who donc req to pay ye. Such exeopon off, aover, not applcabeto any
‘08 (eagey Aor 8) candle. :
cin fore ofthe fo wtb enertined rr wi hts eared ray ober einnaon,
‘eplaionsallbo mad athe forma, 0 eval, in aes! Bega Heal Reenivnen Board Webse (aru mth hy
‘ese te hn clsng dle shale ee,
la cas, ay of he statement mada lathe aprcaton 5 soseuenty foun tobe win a Rnowege of the
‘cantidales, his! her candidature wil be lable 10 canedlfalon, and even Wt appolied to-a post onthe reste’ of this,
ed, Will supprestion et any mata Tact wl lo ba nly
Cankstes shoud take particular note that ens in UB appicaon submited tthe Bodrd mist be made exreciy
‘pint al the lems whlch wil be keated as fel and naggbefaon aid ‘additon ints regard wil be éntetaged ater full
‘ssn of he appcaten;Appteation not ui Med iygound compete ordelectve kang respec of wiht fe wl
alae rejection,
Candas must full the ossentatqualetion by
‘Alnsmaienegatdng selection recumant (date o
‘ofmme he the Board Website at worwawbhrt In.
shag date,
on, date of interviow etc} tothe post wil be avalible, te
et roqul
- ®) Keane &. 3 certicale i: supp of hither. cil from 3 cmpetent
auhonty of fal ates sca ab igaiho West Cogateant ‘STs (Wsndicallon) At, 1994 and
‘8C5/5TS Watlare Department order No. 261cTIer/M 10084 dat 09.04.1905 road wth 8.0.0. Delt. Créer
Now 8320-BCHIMR-84/10 dated 24.09.2010]:
‘Scanned with CamScanner + Inthe ot ns
Min Kota, coe
Mamttlos or iat Member oF $e sig one ors Parson wit slit Wl be antral fer
submission ofthe application,
(2) Persons with Disabilides (Physica
Nodtal Board jo West Bana
Participation) Rules, 1996)
(©) Tho West Bengal Health Recaitmenl aa
candoans asia larnereaon
Originat Cortifcates relating to
Aiaabilly (40% and above) wit have to bow
fumish any certificate of any oer folevant
certicat trom an appropriata
40 ar ahve Just ay acral em an por
sates (Equal Oppartas,
require such futher prot or pares from the
aaa neues rogues oS.
tral), age, qualcalions, catle (SCASTIBC), Physical
ae te WSHRE ask or tem. Hany candle Fs
entor Information relaing fo Nether candidature win the lone
specied by the Board hier da fey oti maybe passed over witout urber reference to hiner.
A candidate should note that hiss hee
‘Subjoct fo determination af his/her ef
appointment a candidate i found hi
cancelled without further reference
Canvassing: Any attompt an the pat o
on to the Examination! itorviaw willbe daemed provisfons!
respects I atany stig even ata Issue of a tar of
Ee i ereninaten hare eanciatte wil be
Important Dates:
Website Link open ~ Far orvline Rogisiraion of Applications. "28.02.2016 to 09.08.2016 ( belore 6 PM).
Payton f Fes at Baik rach (OF a) GEOSZOTSTS THUS 2OTG (op to bankaghoars).
THOR ZOIBT Btano SPY.
ask dal ofa subieston of Form
Note: :
closing date and nat to walt tll the fast date ta avél
Internet/website.
CCanctites are requested to fallow tho websto fui
22.02.2016 3
‘candidates are advised Ia thelr own Interest apply using Online Applfeation Form much betore the
congestion on Web-Server an‘aécount of heavyload on
1) trom tia to ta for day update ilermation,
“Secretary. 8 Contralles of Examinations
‘West Bengal Health Recrultment Board
Scanned with CamScanner West Bengal Health Recruitment Board
plies lnealecenevant wi
3 a
_AesHOWLEDOEMENT SLIP TOR REC og INSPECTOR OF ORUOS UNDER
Eton Recast oe rec
Dag conn
= 7
La eeroner 20S MER ERESTORTEOF RU Ca
su ou
eqns ee “Raverisemeit No,
unas sun OAR Wy Insp-D/S 712016
ome COTM OANERES
ne
fncebe MARA DANE
eae
ovate sos
ete se Sty tage
hives ned
hans
——
esc ostowt He
et coors CNP DULME NADIA FURULLA FURL esr DENGAL 73102
EDUCATIONAL. QUALIFICATION: :
Eaatne Spex Usiveniy isi Yer | Pera
peanens smuna mya hakan Aa PSST OPTIMUS Sr =H
arena bo say coasoctabartreo
| EXPERIENCE DETAILS: a
St ne of Orgatenlon 7 Hospial/ Medial Cae Peed ofsanice Year
iE Fem @onoareen TEAM)
ON ani F aa caeaaoI0
7 | ior aREa OMNI Baa ae
7 fr ocaTTAT aa aaa
|
"indy dest ade iu ona hem apts tes meee nin in 3
abe canto chy cell dm 7 ’
| Srettemat abate ooh bee Inbar nc cc nih ig ello
. aba il d seseay cnecid
foxtoe 1s
inh cums moss err Hug PAmnession
‘Styne fication hand
(0) Unit openers nl be manna ea
‘Scanned with CamScanner ~20 =
‘NAME: SUMODITUR BANERIE,
rash iSSECTOR OF DRUGS UNDER DIRECTORATE OF brit conTROL
| qecisraaTion No: 37496 SHIT: Ds
ROLL (TABLE) fo, axap8l (TABLE ®)
esr
{ADDRES: COOKS COMPOUND 90 DULM WADIA ,PURULIAgURUUIA. Wes Be-723102
‘bar Gadi, 2
‘Wi fence our Nobenton No AdveNa, Rep D/I7(2016 ded 22.022016 Fr rerament io th pons of laspestor Drape ide
‘iesonaot Drogeonrl, Health 2 Fanly Walle Depa feat Bengal -yor are blog ald fo Ttevlew, The Interview
pecan ate
eres eae ee 1h] pesatmirtew | Repere:tie
uae cans nae
et morn, arta : |
of lg forthe np led pst apt cur Advertisement. You sre
puso gal ie flowing secessay etna cries long hss of pole f documents daly aaa i ou vedio
slender al be rune ek and ieee wil te
LY ety Cut erp on Ca AAD
deplete naga agin Cue
cai ce ofS a on
hy ese lope
& Gefen a caged abet song wid
(6 Hig Qualia, if any ( Cenfate& Mukshee)
2 Coat epics nema
GF Svc Enpleye Cereus, any
2 eunteolpmapt i orponoewichote
tp patel tyes open rt
escent youl cleaned pe ae ec
m
Nene ette Pet Lapa, Sanne, Cera are rao
TWA cme
Sree esoinary
& Conrller af Eainlnione
‘West egal Meath Reerenen aed
Scanned with GamScanner 28.01.2020
co)
WPS. 120 0f 2018
Avijit Das and Ors.
yerous-
‘The State of West Bengal and Ors,
Mr. P.S. Bhattacharya,
Mr. Uday Narayan Betal......::For the petitioners.
Mr. Kishore Datta,
‘apan Kumar Muldherjee,
Mr. Somnath Naslear.
Mr. Bikash Ranjan Neogi,
Ms. Ananya Neogt,
Mz. Guddu Singh..
‘For the respondent
nos. 6 to 80.
Affidavit in reply filed by the petitioners shall be retained with the records,
‘The petitioners had responded to an advertisement dated February 22,
2016 issued by the West Bengal Health Recruitment Board (hereafter ‘the Board)
inviting online applications from eligible candidates for appointment on 88
(cighty-eight) poste of Inspector of Drugs under the Directorate of Drugs Control,
‘West Bengal. They were unsuccessflll in their pursuit to obtaln employment as
Such, and approached the West Bengal Administrative Tribunal (hereafter the
tribunal) by presenting ©.A. 1046 of 2017. In such application, inter alla, the
following relief was sought:
c. Pass an appropriate order or direction commanding the respondents
and each of them and/or their competent authorities to forthwith to adopt
appropriate, suitable and rotational method of marks distribution pattem
for adjudging the merit of the candidates for selection to the posts of
Inspector of Drugs under Directorate of Drugs Control as per the
Advertisement No. R/Insp.D/37(1)/2016 dated 22.02.2016 by abandoning,
the advertisement marks distribution pattern, so that the most deserving
and meritorious candidates should be appointed hy that process;
‘The tribunal, at the time of admission of the original application, by its
order dated November 29, 2017 granted interim relief and thereby stayed the
~21- process of sclection. The respondents were restrained from offering appointment
to the empaneled candidates without obtaining prior leave of the tribunal. An
application was filed by the respondents (M.A. 112 of 2018) seeking leave to
appoint 52 (fifty-two) selected candidates, Such application was heard by the
tribunal along with the original application. Upon final hearing, the original
application stood dismissed by a judgment and order dated September 27, 2018.
‘The only ground on which the original application failed before the tribunal was
that the petitioners had taken a chance of selection and having failed to succeed,
could not have turned around and challenged the selection process discovering
that the result was not palatable to them. Such judgment and order is the
subject matter of challenge in this writ petition.
Out of the five petitioners, there is no dispute that the petitioners 1, 3 and
4 full the eligibility criteria for selection, However, there is serious dispute with
regard to the qualifications of the petitioners 2 and 5 qua experience. We wish to
deal with the claims of the petitioners 2 and 5 on a different date, since the
parties have prayed for time to retum better prepared.
So far as the petitioners 1, 3 and 4 are concerned, we have heard the
parties on the merits of their respective claims.
It appears that the qualifications for appointment on the posts of inspector
of drugs have been laid down by rules framed under Article 909 of the
Constitution of India, notified vide memo dated December 3, 1965, it has since
been amended by memo dated August 27, 2001. Originally, it was the Public
Service Commission, West Bengal that was entrusted with the task of conducting
the process of selection but subsequently, with the constitution of the Board by
the Health and Family Welfare Department of the State Government vide
notification dated August 1, 2012, published in the Kolkata Gazette dated
September 12, 2012, the Board is now the body entrusted with the functions of conducting the process of selection and recommending appointment, inter alia,
on the posts of inspector of drugs. Such notification at sub-paragraph 1
paragraph C ordains that the “existing recruitment rules for each category of the
posts will remain valid mutatis mutandis until further order’ and the Board “will
select candidates as per these recruitment rules",
Surprisingly, the Board in its 96% meeting held on April 21, 2017, Le., aftes
advertisement dated February 22, 2016 was issued pureuant whereto the
petitioners had responded, toole a decision in respect of distribution of marks as
follows:
‘The issue of distribution of marks for the selection process in connection
with the direct recruitment to the posts of Inspector of Drugs under
Directorate of Drugs Control under the Health & Family Welfare
Department, Government of West Bengal, waa taken up and the Board
unanimously decided the marks distribution pattern as follows:
Marks distribution for Inspector of Drugs
A Degree
a. Pharmacy
‘b, Pharmaceutical Chemistry
& Medicine with epecialization in Clinical Pharmacclogy
‘4 Microbiology
i) a) Experience of work in recognized Institutions) fora minimum total
period of five years
im the markiacture r/testing of drugs or fenforeement of the
provisions of the Drugs and Cosmetics Act, 1940 (23 of 1940)
b) Addl. Experience in excess of 5 years (per year § : maximum 10)
10
Working experience with Govt. (For 1 year or more)
05
iv) Interview 15
(bold in original)
Im pursuance of the notification dated August 1, 2012, the Board was
fequired to assess cach candidate and embark on selection based on the Rules
framed under Article 309 of the Constitution. Such mules, however, speak of only
academic qualifications, experience and age. Intriguingly, no particular
procedure of selection is postulated by such rules. The advertisement dated February 22, 2016 was also silent in respect of the procedure for selection. To
our mind, if the Board had restricted assessment of each candidate on the basis
of bis academic qualification, experience and performance in interview, the same
would have been @ plausible course of action since interview (though not
epecified in the rules) is a well-recognized method of selection and is often
resorted to for assessing the personality of a job aspirant, Additionally, though
not so specifically provided, interview of the candidates conducted by the Board
could not have been impeached by any of the petitioners since upon receiving the
call letters, none of them objected to the same and they appeared at such
interview without any demur, Although it is not for the courts to re-determine the
‘appropriate method of selection, we arc inclined to the view that after issuance of
the advertisement and immediately, prior to conducting the process of selection,
the Board ought not to have taken a décision to assess the job aspirants on the
basis of additional experience (10 marks) and working experiance with the
Government (§ marks) in addition to assessing their candidature on the basis of
their academic qualifications (40 marks), experience (90 marks) and interview (15
marks), and allotting marks to cach candidate out of a total of ‘100’ marks
instead of 85’ marks, Distribution of marks in the manner decided by the Board
in its 96% mecting amounted to a change in the rules of the game after the game
had started, which is impermissible having regard to the decision in K,
‘Manjusree vs. State of A.P., reported in (2008) 3 SCC 512.
In our opinion, the Board's jurisdiction having been limited by the
notification dated August 1, 2022, it could not have acted beyond the boundaries
set by the notification constituting it. In that view of the matter, allotment of
marks for additional experience (10 marks) and working experience with the
Government (6 marks) in favour of the candidates who were appointed on the
posts of inspector of drugs, was absolutely illegal, The petitioners were not informed at any stage of the process that the Board had decided to award marke
for additional experience and working experience with the Government and,
therefore, it was nota case where the petitioners had taken a chance of selection
and having failed to get selected, eurned around to challenge the process of
selection, We have, therefore, proceaded to assess the merits of the petitioners
qua the candidates who have since been appointed on the basis of a total of 85
marks, instead of 100" marks.
From the records, it has been found that the petitioners 1, 9 and 4 scored
178, 78.5 and 79 marks out of ’85' marks, respectively. Such maria obtained by
the petitioners 1, 9 and 4 out of a total of "85" marka are moré than the marks
obtained by a number of candidates who have since been appointed.
However, before we proceed to consider as to whether the petitioners 1, 3
and 4.are entitled to any relief, we ought to examine the reason assigned by the
tribunal for dismissal of the original application. It is na doubt true that the
petitioners participated in the process of aclection without demur and had
assailed the-result thereof only when they were not suecessful in entering the
zone of consideration for public employment. Pertinently, at no stage prior to
declaration of results of selection were the petitioners 1, 9 and 4, or for that
ratter the petitioners 2 and 5, informed that they would be assessed not only on
the basis of academic qualifications, experience and interview, but also on the
‘basis of additional experience and working experience with the Governiment, The
petitioners were all along under the impression that not only they but the other
aspirants’ candidature would be assessed and marks allotted for academic
quolifcations and experience, and perhaps interview once they were called
therefor, Since the petitioners 1, 3 and'4 had no prior knowledge of a departure
from the preseribed procedure being made by the Board in that marke were
allotted for additional experience and experience in working with the Government, they could not have laid a challenge td such departure from the
Procedure prior to the results being declared, No material has been shown to
establish that the petitioners did have such a prior knowledge. The decision of
the tribunal appears to be in the tecth of the recent decision of the Supreme
Court in Civil Appeal No, 9482 of 2019 : Dr. (Major) Mecta Sahai vs. State of
Bihar & ors. (2028 SCC OnLine SC 1632]. tn Meeta Sahaf (supra), thas been
hheld that the principle (noticed in paragraph 16) aust be differentiated for those
candidates, who by agreeing to participate in the aelection process only accept
the prescribed procedure and not the illegality in following such procedure. In a
situation where a candidate alleges misconstruction of statutory rules and
‘discriminating consequences arising therefrom, the same cannot be condoned
merely because a candidate has partalcen in it,
‘Similar view taken by the tribunal earlier while epurning a challenge to
selection process which was initiated and conducted in departure from the
Presoribed procedure, did not receive the approval of this Court in Md, Zakir
Hossain ve, The State of West Bengal & ors, reported in (2019) 6 WBLR 225.
We, therefore, hold that the tribunal was not justified in rejecting the
claims of the petitioners 1, 3 and 4.
‘The State Government is directed to appoint the petitioners 1, 3 and 4 as
inspector of drugs immediately but not later than a fortnight from date of receipt
of a copy ofthis order.
‘The dates of appointment of the petitioners 1, 3 and 4 shall relate back to
the date on which candidates in the merit lst, who secured marks equal to or
lesser than the petitioners 1, 3 and 4, came to be appointed. Such petitioners
shall not be entitled to any szrears of financial beneiite but benefits shall flow to
them on and from the dates of appointment, However, the period during which
the petitioners 1, 3 and 4 could not discharge duty as inspectors of druge shall be counted for the purpose of calculating their qualifying service for pension and
other benefits, which would have accrued to them but for the delayed
‘appointments. Insofar as seniority in service is concemed, however, they shall
rank below the candidates already appointed.
Be it placed on record that we have resisted ourselves from interfering with
the selection process as a whole since the private respondents have already been.
appointed and working as inspectors of drugs for quite some time, and slso that
because there are vacancies where the petitionere 1, 3 and 4 can be
‘accommodated.
List the writ petition on L1% February, 2020 for consideration of the claims
of the petitioners 2 and 5. It is made clear that similar relief granted to the
Petitioners 1, 3 and 4 may be exteniled to the petitioners 2 and 5, should they
‘succeed in their claim that they had requisite experience and were thus eligible
for consideration of their candidature,
(DIPANKAR DATTA, 3.)
(PROTIK PRAKASH BANERJEE, J.)
-Qz- 1
_ The secretary :
4 eal & Farly Welfare Department
Government of West Bengal, swasthya shawan
(29, SectonY, Salt Lake, Kalats-700091.
2, Tha secretary TREGEIVED
‘West Bengal Health Recrultmient Board ‘' {Conaerts Not Venting)
GH 2, Sector, Saletake, Kotata-700051 rectorate of Grogs Conrat
0 MAR 2021
<2 the predor on '
Directorate of Drugs Contot aah
as, india Exchange Place Extension Pees
IT Building, $* Floor, Kolkata-700073,
subject Paves for appolntment as nspecer of uy”
ected Sir
| MPS Sadhu Sede, csng at cots Compound, PO: Dunia, Dstt:
: Pull, West Bengal, Pn: 723102, participated Inthe selection process for appolatment to
the post of Tnspector of Orugs’ under ‘The oirectorate of Drugs Controfs My registration
nuanber was 374494 and from ‘Unreserved category’ The Rol (able) number was 202391
(Table). 1 made this application In-terms of;the advertisement no R/lnsp.0/37(A)/2016
i dated 22 February 2016 issued by West Bengal fia Recruitment Board
and: pilor to conduct the process of
selection, the board took 2 decison to assess the Job aspirants on the basis of addtional
i ‘emperience (10 marks) and working experience if Government sector {5 marks) In addltion
: to asessng candldature on the basis of acadeile qualleaton (40 marks], expertence (30
marks) and Interview (25 marks) and along sacks to each candidate out of total 100
| ‘matks instead of 85 marks. %
i That distibution of marks In the imafiner decided by ‘West Bengal Heath
i Recrultment Boar inits 96" meeting amounted change fa the rues of the game,
Some canditates who patkipated inthe Interew moved before the state
‘Adrloltative Tribunal but the tribunal did’ Iitéfare with the decision ofthe board.
That a wit petition wat moved before the Honorable High court belng W.P.S.T. 120
of 2018 wherein the Honorable High Court passed an order dvacting the State Government
to appolnt the petitioners as ‘Inspector of Orgs’ considering the marks for addtlonal
‘exoerlenee 10 marks} and marks for Government experlence (5 marks) are legal
unthy fauga OOM?
Searcy anja
avs 08 Hoek 202)
‘Scanned with CamScanner £ oe
due to
That my case stands same footing. ajtiouteh, I was In the ellgibte ist but
of rules as decided by the bel ins a6 meeting I cauld not come to the zone of
BE gensiderotlon. | came to knows frrh raltable sousce thoty | secured more marks than the. wit
gutioners vi. AVI DBS, Suman swam! aed Bhaskar Das.
2 1n this circumstance, 1, pray before your gosidself to appoint me as “inspector of
E> ruge’ belng a successful candidate and a my case stafds at sd footing Oue to COVIO-39
demic situation, | could not'3pproach in time anid such delay:In approaching your good
pan
ote ventilating my grfevance'be condoned sympathetically.
!hope my case would-be considered by yaur gai office In terms of the order passed
in W.P-S-T. 120 of 2028 dated 28 January 2020 and shall be highly obliged,
%
&
‘Yours faithfully
Srumnctny fb anager
Date: OF Moheh 202] § SUMODHUR BANERJEE,
° 5/0 Goutam Banerjee
Cooks Compound
PO: DulmiNadiha
District: Purulta (West Bengal)
Pin: 723102
Enclosure:
1. Copy of W.P.S-T. 120 of 2018
2. Photocopy of admit card
‘Scanned with CamScanner 48
IN THE WEST BENGAL STATE
ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL
BIKASH BHAWAN, SALT LAKE
CITY, KOLKATA - 700 091.
An application under section 19 of
the Administrative Tribunal Act,
1985.
0. A. NO. OF 2021;
In the matter of:
Sumodhur Banerjee
Applicant
-Versus-_
The State of West Bengal & Ors.
.. Respondents
APPLICATION
Tanuja Basak
Advocate
C/o, Mr. Ekramut Bari,
Advocate
Bar Association, Room No.-8
High Court, Calcutta. 4 ORDER SHEET 4 4 \r
“WEST BENGAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL
Bikash Bhavan, Salt Lake, Kolkata — 700 091.
nt-
‘The Hon’ble Justice Soumitra Pal, Chairman
The Hon’ble Sayeed Ahmed Baba, Administrative Member
Case No. — OA 637 of 2021
SUMODHUR BANERJEE -VERSUS- THE STATE OF WEST BENGAL & ORS.
rial No. For the Applicants + Mr. Ekramul Bari,
d Mrs. Sonali Mitra,
ie of Advocates
der
For the State Respondents : Mr. Gautam Pathak Banerjee,
Advocate ry
Heard Mr, Ekramul Bari, leamed advocate for the appliggrand Mir, Gautaan
Pathak Banerjee, learned advocate for the respondents. OS
Lt reply be filed by 10% June, 2022. Rejoindesgiagy, by 27" June, 2022.
Matter to appear under the heading “Reply/Rejoj Oe
2022.
‘The point of maintainability of we
ler/Mbjection” on 29 June,
application raised on behalf of
the respondents is kept open.
(SAYEED AHMED BABA) S : (SOUMITRA PAL)
MEMBER (A) CHAIRMAN,
Ke
y ®
Bikash Bhavan; Salt Lake, Rolkata ~ 700091.
UBRATA CHANDRA POLLEY LEARNED REGISTRAR.
fos - OA 637 OF 2024 oo
CMODEURBANERIER: ~ SASH Wan Susie oF rege MILA. mons.
aLNG,ond = “Rorthe appli : + Mr, Tanyja:Basak,
soPorder. * Aiatate
SCN.
‘nthe present application, the applicant bas prayed-for his appointment
Tnispeoter of Druga per-advertisement dated 29™ February, 2016 in pu
thie Solethh: judgetabhofithe Hot’ ble High, Court, Caleutta, passed S
No. 120062018, QS
“Considering WE HAUL OF the prayer, the applicant
copy df‘the-applicsition:alongewith l. annexure State respondents by
hand or by speed yoxt with proof of delivery, ey a-copy ofthis order
intimating the next ate of appearance of dees Espondents.
Fix 4" April, 2022 Be aafesatie of the State respondents and
compliance of the aftresdiddigedtiGW by the applicant by filing service report
supported by-a-verificat ASS
(SUBRAT, OLE)
WY ) S\
ORDER SHEET
® WEST BENGAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL
mt
Bikash Bhavan, Salt Lake, Kolkata — 700 091.
“~ MR. SUBRATA CHANDRA POLLE, LEARNED REGISTRAR
Case No. ~OA-637 of 2021
Sumodhur Banerjee - VERSUS ~ THE STATE OF WEST BENGAL & ORS.
tial No.
d
tte of order
02
404.2022,
CSMIHS
For the Applicant’ : Mrs. S. Mitra,
Advocate.
For the State Respondent: Mr. G. P. Banerjee, aw
Advocate. 7 wv
Affidavit of service filed today in terms of the previous order anit
same be kept on record. : Ww
Mr. GP: Banerjee, leaned counsel appears for the St Qin .
‘Mrs, S. Mitra, learned counsel appearing for 1 licant has prayed
for placing the matter before the Hon’bie gee corisideration of
representation of the applicant being Annexure-E Mi
Mr. Gl
fas not been opposed by
Banerjee, learned counsel.
Considering the nature of see the matter be placed before the 1
Division Bench for consideration of lief as prayed for by the applicant.
The Office is di ~ enlist the matter in the daily cause list on
22.04,2022 under the ney ‘Admission Hearing”
> (SUBRATA CH. POLLE)
vy REGISTRAR ORDER SHEET S2-
= bode BENGAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL
Bikash Bhavan, Salt Lake, Kolkata— 700 091.
sent : HON’BLE JUSTICE SOUMITRA PAL, HON’BLE CHAIRMAN &
HON’BLE SAYEED AHMED BABA, ADMINISTRATIVE MEMBER.
Case No. — OA 637 of 2021.
SUMODHUR BANERJEE -VERSUS-THE STATE OF WEST BENGAL & ORS.
‘erial No. and
Date of order
ee
79.6.2022 For the Applicant : Mrs. S. Mitra,
Advocate.
For the State respondents: Mr. GP. Banerjee,
Advocate,
«
Heard leaimed advocates for the parties. wea
Let the matter appear under the heaig Reply, Rejoinder and
Objection” on 1* August, 2022. ee
(SAYEED AHMED BABA) : (SOUMITRA PAL)
MEMBER(A) = > CHAIRMAN.
Skg. ORDER SHEET S23
WEST BENGAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL
Bikash Bhavan, Salt Lake, Kolkata —700 091.
Present-*
‘The Hon’ble Justice Soumitra Pal, Chairman,
& ‘The Hon’ble Sayeed Ahmed Baba, Administrative Member.
Case No. ~OA 637 of 2021.
Sumodhur Banerjee, — Versus — The State of West Bengal and Others.
Serial No. and For the Applicant
Mrs. $. Mitra,
Date of order ‘Advocate, >
06 For the State Respondents : Me. G.P. Banerjee, Y
01.08.2022. Advocate.
As prayed for by Mr. G. P. Banerjee, leamed advocate RQ
the State respondents, time to file reply is extended till 2" Septe
2022. Rejoinder, if any, by 16” September, 2022. Let the mat
under the heading “Reply / Rejoinder and oveeee om ae
September, 2022. ad
(SAYEED AHMED BABA)
MEMBER (A)
SM ORDERSHEET 5 a
WEST BENGAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL
Bikash Bhavan, Salt Lake, Kolkata —700 091,
SUBRATA CHANDRA POLLE, LEARNED REGISTRAR.
Case No. — OA 637 of 2021.
SUMODHUR BANERJEE ~- VS- THE STATE OF WEST BENGAL & ORS.
Serial No. and
Date of order
For the Applicant : Mrs, S. Mitra, LY
6 Advocate.
219.2022
For the State respondents : Mr. GP. Banerjee,
Advocate.
Learned counsel appearing for the State respondents haf ly prayed
for time to file reply against the original application which is ly opposed by
learned counsel for the applicant. S
Considering the nature of the case, tinfeyig, granted to file reply by 2°
December, 2022 in default, the case record laced before the Hon’ble Bench
for order.
S
& (SUBRATA CH. POLLE)
- S REGISTRAR.
“Y ORDER SHEET Ss. ioe e Ss
WEST BENGAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL
Bikash Bhavan, Salt Lake, Kolkata —700 091.
ae
SUBRATA CHANDRA POLLE LEARNED REGISTRAR
Case No. — OA 637 OF 2021
SUMODHUR BANERJEE -VERSUS- THE STATE OF WEST BENGAL & ORS.
al No. and
> of order
For the Applicant + Mrs, Sonali Mitra,
7 Advocate »
12.2022
For the Respondents : Mr, Gautam Pathak a
Advocate
‘The matter is taken up pursuant to the order contained i a S
exercise of the powers conferred under the Administrative ls Act, 1985
No. 638-WBAT / 2J-15/2016 (Pt.-II) dated 23" Novem! = ‘issued in
and the Rules framed thereunder.
Leamed counsel appearing for the spittin has eamestly
prayed for time to file reply against Sa application which is
7 vehemently opposed by learned counsey r the applicant.
Considering the nature of os % last chance is granted to file reply
by 03.02.2023 and a copy of AY Sto be served upon the learned counsel
for the applicant in advane
(SUBRATA CH. POLLE)
REGISTRAR, ORDER SHEET
WEST BENGAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL
Bikash Bhavan, Salt Lake, Kolkata — 700 091.
Present -
‘The Hon’ble Sayeed Ahmed Baba, Officiating Chairperson and Administrative Member.
Case No. ~OA 637 of 2021
modhur Banerjee. - Versus - The State of West Bengal & Others.
Serial No. and For the Applicant : Mrs, S. Mitra,
Date of order Advocate.
08 “For the State Respondents : Ms. A. P. Banerjee,
03.02.2023,
Advocate.
‘The matter is taken up by the Single Bench pursuant to the.
order contained in the Notification No. 638-WBAT/2J-15/2016 (Pt. ID,
dated 23° November, 2022 issued in exercise of the powers coriferted
under Section 5 (6) of the Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985; "4
On consent of the leamed counsels for the coritsting! parties,
the case is taken up for consideration sitting singly 4,
No report has been filed by the vstpans, despite last
chance given on the previous dates. The nates to appointment of
the applicant for the post of Inspector acl Driigs under Department of
Health and Family Welfare. aired
Mrs. S. Mitra, leamed advocate for the applicant submits that
the matter may be heard one next date.
Let the matt appear under the heading “Hearing”
12.06.2023.
(SAYEED AHMED BABA)
Officiating Chairperson and Member (A)
ISAM uve sHEIEL
WEST BENGAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL Po 4
Bikash Bhavan, Salt Lake, Kolkata ~ 700 091.
‘TH Hon ble Sayeed Ahmed Babs, Officiating Chairperson and Administrative Member,
Case No. -OA 637 of 2021
Sumodhur Banerjee. - Versus - The State of West Bengal & Others.
Serial No.and For the Applicant > Mrs. S. Mitra,
Date of order “Advocate.
09 ror : . Baner
izotbagy, For the State Respondents : Mr. G.P. Banerjee,
Advocate,
s
»
“
‘The matter is taken up by the Single Bench pursuant to the,
coxder contained in the Notification No, 638-WBAT/2I-15/2016 (Pt-1..
dated 23" November, 2022 issued in exercise of the powers coitetigd
under Section 5 (6) of the Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985; ab nae
On consent of the teamed counsels for the contesting parties,
the case is token up for consideration sitting singly.
Due to paucity of time, fet the mattér'by listed under the
heading “Hearing” on 06.12.2023, =. SF .
‘Sh Sayeed Ahmed Baba
‘Otctting Chairperson & Momber (A)
S.M./118.
Certified to be: Tiwe Copy
Reosryeijer
ws icon fa MA
TAR abn Al Dae Of Date on which the doennient Dato of
application ja ready for delivery delivery
WEST BENGAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL
Bikush Bhavan, Salt Lake, Kolkats-700091 |
wad 7
Appliention No, O74 pssyoorpta—63% ef goa
Provent : 1, Mie $f Bada, Hoypble offered trpocson ond Member A)
APPLICANT(8) RESPONDENT(S)
$+ Bomenfer Stale. oF WBZ of4-
‘Court Fee Exempted
Jos /23
‘Section Officer? Supa HA.
REPRESENTED BY West tengal Administrative Tribunal
REPRESENTED BY :
5. tdhiq BP. Bomecpre (RUE Stee
WEST BENGAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL
Bikash Bhavan, Salt Late, Kotkata ~700 091.
“The Won'ble Sayeed Ahmed Bab, Officiating Chatrperson and Adi
istrative Member.
Case No. -OA 637 of 2021
Sumodhur Banerjec. - Versus - The State of West Bengal & Others.
Setiat No, and For the Applicant
+ Mrs. S. Mitra,
Date of order
Advocate.
For the State Respondents : Mr. G. P. Banerjee,
avecot a
ae
‘Te ater ten yp by the Single Boneh parame te the
You might also like
