PRADIP KUMAR NAIYA Vs. STATE OF WEST BENGAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) By an order dtd. 7/4/2022 passed in WPA no. 18548 of 2018, a Coordinate Bench of this court directed that the writ petition being WPA 18548 of 2018 should be heard along with WP no. 10737(W) of 2018 and WPA 11142 of 2021. From the order dtd. 18/8/2022 passed in W.P. no. 10737(W) of 2018, it is explicit that the respondents had referred to the order passed in FMA 488 of 2004 and MAT 1967 of 2004 in support of their stand and hence, FMA 488 of 2004 has been tagged with the writ petitions.

(2.) Assailing the resolution adopted by the selection committee on 12/5/2016 and an order vide. no. 128 dtd. 30/4/2018 whereby the final gradation lists for the years 2016 and 2017 were accepted and directed to be published, the writ petition being WP no. 10737(W) of 2018 was preferred. Praying for cancellation of order no. 196 dtd. 10/8/2018, whereby the five employees being the private respondent nos. 5 to 9 to the writ petition were promoted to the posts of BC, Gr.-I, WPA 18548 of 2018 was instituted whereas in WPA no. 1142 of 2021, the petitioner questions the defensibility of the order vide. no. 114 dtd. 19/3/2021 passed by the Learned Chief Judge, City Sessions Court, Calcutta whereby a direction was given to publish the final gradation lists for the years 2018, 2019 and 2020.

(3.) The conundrum posited in all those three writ petitions is as to whether in respect of the promotion to the posts of BC, Gr-I in the City Sessions Court (hereinafter referred to as the Court), the reservation policy and/or the 50-point roster were required to be adhered to and/or applied and what norms should have been followed for giving such promotion, is it 'only merit' or is it 'merit-cum-seniority' or 'seniority-cum-merit' or 'seniority only".