ASHIM MOULICK Vs. STATE OF WEST BENGAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) We have heard the learned Counsel for the parties. The petitioner had challenged the order dated 5th December, 2013 passed in O.A. 402 of 2013 by the West Bengal Administrative Tribunal. Aggrieved by the fact that he has not been appointed as a Driver Grade-II in Pool Car Office, Kolkata, the petitioner preferred in O.A. 402 of 2013. His contention in O.A. 402 of 2013 was that, persons who were less qualified than him have been appointed to the post. He, therefore, prayed that the order dated 06.02.2013 passed by the Administrative Officer, Pool Car Office, Kolkata should be quashed. He, further, sought a direction to the Respondents to issue an appointment letter in his favour. The other prayer sought by the petitioner was a direction to Respondent No. 3 to implement the letter dated 10th May, 2010 in which the petitioner had been declared a successful participant in the selection process and for other consequential benefits.

(2.) The contention of the petitioner is that since he is better qualified and more meritorious than those who have been appointed to the aforesaid post he must also be appointed to the post.

(3.) The argument advanced on behalf of the petitioner is fallacious. The petitioner has not made any of the persons who have been selected or appointed parties to the Original Application. Therefore, he cannot seek any relief against their appointment. Moreover, the petitioner's case that he was better qualified than the others who have been appointed could have been examined only if he had made those persons parties to the Original Application. Having fail to do so, the petitioner cannot now contend that he has been excluded wrongly.