JAYANTA KUMAR BHATTACHARYA Vs. STATE OF WEST BENGAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is an application under Article 226 of the Constitution of India wherein the writ petitioner seeks appointment for the post of Headmaster for having requisite qualification and experience.

(2.) Mr. Ghosh Chowdhury, learned Counsel appearing for the writ petitioner submits that the applicable rules pertaining to eligibility for the post of Headmaster/Headmistress in 2012 was that the candidate was required to have secured at least 40% marks in Post Graduate Examination and the candidate was required to have at least ten years' experience as teacher. New Rules were introduced regarding eligibility for the post of Headmaster in March 2015 whereunder the experience of ten years remained unchanged as also the 40% marks remained unchanged. In September 2016, further fresh Rules were introduced whereunder the required teaching experience remained ten years but the requisite marks were enhanced from 40% to 45% in the Post Graduate Examination. Again in March 2017, the Rules were amended and the required marks was enhanced to 50%.

(3.) Mr. Ghosh Chowdhury contends that the writ petitioner became eligible for the post of Headmaster prior to the amendment of 2017. Had the examination for appointment to the post of Headmaster been held prior to the amendment of 2017, the petitioner would have been entitled to participate in the examination since the requisite marks under the old Rules was 45 per cent. Mr. Ghosh Chowdhury submits that the 2017 amendment is wholly unreasonable and arbitrary and cannot affect the vested right that has accrued in favour of the writ petitioner. He has challenged the vires of the 2017 Amendment. Hence let a copy of the writ petition be served on the office of the learned Advocate General for the State of West Bengal.