SNEHANSU RAKSHIT Vs. STATE OF WEST BENGAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) All four writ petitioners applied for the post of Assistant Teacher for Upper Primary Schools (barring physical education and work education) and participated in the first State Level Selection Test (SLST) 2016 for that purpose. Learned Counsel appearing for the writ petitioners inform the court that the writ petitioners have filed writ petition for verification of documents under Rule 12 of The West Bengal School Service Commission (Selection for Appointment to the posts of teacher for Upper Primary Level of schools) Rules, 2016. The perceived injury urged by learned Counsel appearing for the writ petitioners is that the School Service Commission has proceeded to publish two notices dated 27th June 2019 and 28th June 2019 announcing that Personality Tests of eligible candidates will be conducted from 2nd July 2019 to 15th July 2019 and that the details of the programme of the Personality Test will be made available in the website of the commission. The second notice of 28th June 2019 declares that the specified writ petitions in the said notice and "other writ petitions and left out writ petitioner's programme for verification of documents.........will be organized by WBSSC on 06.07.2019..............".

(2.) Counsel challenges the publication of the two notices which, according to counsel, are in derogation of the 2016 Rules. Counsel relies on Rule 12 and the successive stages contemplated under the said Rule, namely Online Applications against the available vacancies; preparation of list of eligible candidates for a computer generated data base; verification of certificates and academic and professional qualifications and preparation and publishing of an Interview List with all details of the candidates for being considered for Personality Test. The next stage (Rule 12 (5)) is concerned with the post-interview stage when the commission shall publish a merit list, category wise, on the basis of the evaluation to be done under the said sub-rule. For a proper understanding of what learned Counsel for the petitioners apprehend, Rule 12 (4) of the 2016 Rules is required to be set out:

(3.) The primary point urged by Counsel for the petitioners is that the Commission cannot publish notices for conducting Personality Tests until and unless the stages prior to Rule 12 (4) have been complied with. Counsel raises the additional point that there is a mandate on the Commission under Sub-rule 4 of Rule 12 to prepare and publish in its website an interview list "with all details of the candidates to be called for Personality Test .............. on the basis of merit as mentioned in Part A of Schedule II in the ratio of 1:1.4 of final vacancies". Counsel submits that instead of the procedure provided, the Commission has introduced a system of individual candidates keying in their particulars and getting to know whether they have qualified for the Personality Test. The apprehension is that since Rule 12 (4) mentions the ratio of the vacancies, the petitioners, whose verification has not even commenced, may be deprived of their chance for being considered for the available number of vacancies.