Chinmay Dolai vs State Of West Bengal & Ors.

This writ petition has been listed under the heading '‘To Be Mentioned' at the instance of petitioner citing urgency. Two affidavits-of-service have

been filed. Court is satisfied regarding service, both of copy of petition as well notice of urgency. Writ petition is taken up for being moved. Mr.

Chakraborty, learned advocate appears on behalf of petitioner and submits, his client belongs to category of scheduled caste. His client is challening

advertisement dated 26th December, 2017 published by Dinhata College as well as notification dated 25th August, 2017 since the two taken together

have made it impossible for him to have applied as a candidate for Group-D posts advertised.

Mr. Chakraborty submits, section 10 of West Bengal Universities and Colleges (Administration and Regulation) Act VII of 2017 cannot be relaxed in

the purported manner as by impugned notification. Sections 19 and 20 of the said Act does not allow for providing new provisions in saying that

statutory provision has been relaxed. He then relies on West Bengal Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Reservation of vacancies in Services

and Posts) Act XXVII of 1976, 4 and submits, the advertisement does not reserve the percentage mandated by section 4(1)(a). He also relies on sub-

section (2) of section 4 to submit, instructions to candidates issued following the advertisement requiring one candidate to apply for one post is also

bad.

Mr. Chakraborty submits further, though clause 5 of impugned notification excludes Group â€" D posts candidates from having to possess knowledge

in computer application as desirable but under clause 6(III), additional marks have been provided to be given to those having knowledge in computer

operation. Clause 6(II) provides for additional marks to be given to candidates engaged on contractual or temporary mode in the concerned college for

a period of more than two years which is in conflict with memo dated 24th December, 2018 of Government of West Bengal, Education Directorate

whereby there was direction to abolish every post/engagement which was not sanctioned by the Government.

Mr. Mukherjee, learned advocate appears on behalf of State and submits, sections 19 and 20 of West Bengal Act VII of 2017 provides for relaxation

as has been done in this case. Petitioner did not apply but instead made representation followed by demand for justice and this writ petition. The writ

petition has no merit and it should be dismissed. College is not represented but Court proceeds on satisfaction of service as aforesaid.

Section 19 of West Bengal Act VII of 2017 is not applicable to the present case since impugned notification says that the Governor, inter alia, giving

due regard to the needs of framing new regulations by the West Bengal College Service Commission in regard to what has been stated in the

notification and, in the interest of public service is thereby pleased to relax the requirement of the provision of subsection (1) of section 10 of the Act.

The manner of relaxation has been given in the notification. Nothing has been demonstrated to show that there has been no relaxation in the manner

provided but something else done.

So far contention regarding reservation is concerned, it appears that two vacancies have been notified as reserved for Scheduled Caste category. It

cannot be said that in advertising an aggregate number of vacancies, the percentage reservation provided under section 4(a) of West Bengal Act

XXVII of 1976 has to be applied to that aggregate. The vacancies arise against points in the roaster and impugned advertisement, on this bare

allegation cannot be found to be in violation or not having applied or followed 100-point roster.

The notified relaxation excepting Group-D posts candidates from having desirable computer knowledge yet providing for additional marks is a

procedure of selecting candidates whereby candidate for Group-D posts not having computer knowledge is eligible for walk-in-interview but selection

may be made of a candidate having computer knowledge. So also is the case of a candidate who had been employed on casual or temporary basis by

the college for more than two years as being chosen as against it being eligibility criteria. For reasons aforesaid, challenge of petitioner is found to be

without merit. The writ petition is dismissed.