AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
Arindam Lodh, J
By means of filing the present writ petition, the petitioner has challenged the recruitment of the respondent no.5 in the post of Lower Division Clerk(for short, LDC).
Heard Mr. Somik Deb, learned senior counsel assisted by Mr. P. Chakraborty, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. D. Sarma, learned Addl. GA appearing for the respondents-State.
It is submitted by Mr. Deb, learned senior counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner comes within the purview of PH category. The respondent no.5, though secured lesser marks, has been appointed to the said post by the official respondents depriving the petitioner who has secured higher marks than that of respondent no.5.
Mr. Deb, learned senior counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the said appointment of respondent no.5 should be quashed.
In view of this, issue notice calling upon the respondents to show cause as to why a rule should not be issued as prayed for; and/or as to why such further order or other orders should not be passed as to this court may seem fit and proper.
Notice is made returnable within 6(six) weeks.
Since Mr. Sarma, learned Addl. GA appears and accepts notice on behalf of the respondents-State, no formal notice is called for on behalf of those respondents.
The petitioner is to take steps for causing service of notice upon respondent no.5 within a period of 7 (seven) days by registered post with A/D.
At the request of Mr. Deb, learned senior counsel for the petitioner an indulgence is granted to serve notice upon respondent no.5 through Director, JRBT since the petitioner does not know the address of respondent no.5
List the matter on 09.04.2024.