KHALEDA BEGAM Vs. STATE AND ORS.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard the learned advocate for the petitioner and the learned advocates for the State. Affidavit of service is taken on record. The State of West Bengal is represented.

(2.) The writ petitioner claims that by a mistake she did not inform the respondents-authorities of material fact that she was already working as a para teacher when she made on line application. Thereafter she applied to the Chairman of the School Service Commission bringing on record her actual circumstances but the same was not considered and after intervention by a co-ordinate Bench the said representation was directed to be considered and disposed of in accordance with law. On the date when such consideration was done the writ petitioner was not present. Her allegation is that she received the letter indicating the date of hearing only after the date of hearing.

(3.) No copy of the envelope has been annexed. The envelope in which the intimation was sent would have shown the date through the postal mark on which it was delivered to the post office nearest to the writ petitioner's residence. The best evidence has not been provided by the writ petitioner in support of the allegation that she received the intimation of hearing after the date of hearing. Therefore, her absence cannot be considered to be unintentional.