Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • WP - ST 101 2023 Document

    Uploaded by

    SYEDA MYSHA ALI
    12 views68 pages

    Original Title

    WP.st 101 2023 Document

    Copyright

    © © All Rights Reserved

    Available Formats

    PDF or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    Report this Document

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as PDF or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    12 views68 pages

    WP - ST 101 2023 Document

    Uploaded by

    SYEDA MYSHA ALI

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as PDF or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    of 68
    Sk. Imtiaj Uddin Chamber: _P-91, Nani Gopal Roy Chowdhury ‘Advocate Avenue, 2* Flor, Kolkata - 700014. Bar Association Room No. 8 Se HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Residence: 8A, Elliot Road, Kolkata - 700016 Near Elliot Post Office 2249-268 1(Resi) 9331015890(Mob) E-mail: e.barichambers@gmail.com Date : 13.07.2023 1. The Ld. Government Pleader, High Court, Calcutta 2. The Director of Health and Family Welfare, Government of West Bengal, Swasthya Bhawan, GN-29, Sector - V, Salt Lake City, Kolkata - 700091. 3. The Special Secretary, Department of Health and Family Welfare, M.S. Branch, Swasthya Bhawan, GN-29, Sector- V, Salt Lake City, Kolkata -700 091. 4, West Bengal Health Recruitment Board, service through the Chairman and Chief Executive Officer, office at GN 31, Sector-V, Salt Lake, Kolkata - 700091. 5. Secretary and Controller of Examinations, West Bengal Health Recruitment Board, office at GN 31, Salt Lake, Kolkata.700091. Re.: WPST No. 101 of 2023 Sumodhur Banerjee .». Petitioner -Vs.~ The State of West Bengal & Ors. Respondents Sir(s), Enclosed please find herewith a copy of the Writ Petition with all annexures which will appear before Their Lordships the Hon’ble Justice Debangsu Basak and the Hon'ble Justice Md. Shabbar Rashidi on 19.07.2023 or soon thereafter as and when the business of the Hon'ble Court will permit. Kindly attend at the time of hearing. Thanking you Yours faithfully, Enclo : As above, eo Adv 7113223, 5:33 PM Case Status : Search by Case Number Calcutta High Court - Appellate side 2 Appellate side Case Details. Case Type. West Filing Numbsr 0112025, Filing ater 06-07-2023 Registration Number 01/2023 Registration Date: 06-07-2023 ‘CNR Number = WECHCA-032599.2023 Case Status 7th July 2033 First Hearing Date 7th July 2023 ‘Next Hearing Date ‘Stage of Case IEW MOTION Coram 26604GHON'BLE JUSTICE DEBANGSU BASAK , HONBLE JUSTICE MD, SHABBAR RASHIDI Bench Division Bench. ‘State = West Bengal District URULIA udietal ANDAMUS SECTION Causolist Name. aly List Potitioner and Advocate 7) SUMODHUR BANERJEE, Advocate- SK. IMTIAJ UDDIN Respondent and Advocate 7) STATE OF WEST BENGAL AND ORS, i Tider Aang TT nda Sostionta) (Adriane Tease seus < History of Case Hearing Gauss Ut cae Business Ov] Heatng | Purpose of Type ‘s Date Date hearing HONELE TUSTIGE DEBARSU BASAC, HONGHOSTTE owiytia [RONBLE TUSTCE DEBANGSY 7-072029)ew mono Orders [order “J order Date Order Details Details GROUP A (WRIT MATTERS) (1) ; | Senvces ( Misceianeous (16) OBJECTION ‘ompliance Date [Scrutiny Date [OBJECTION ___Te [06-07-2028 DISTRICT: PURULIA IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA, CONSTITUTIONAL WRIT JURISDICTION {APPELLATE SIDE) wPs.t.No. JQ4 — of2023 Subject matter relating to: under Group : or 5 Head: of the Classification List. CAUSE TITLE Sumodhur Banerjee sesse-ou-Petitioner - Versus ~ The State of West Bengal & Ors. He Respondents Advocate on record: See Bere tay who Advocat C/o. Ekramul Bari, Advocate High Court, Calcutta Bar Association Room No.8 Mobile : 9331015890 E-mail : ¢.barichambers@gmail.com DISTRICT : PURULIA IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA, CONSTITUTIONAL WRIT JURISDICTION (APPELLATE SIDE) W.P.S.T. NO, of 2023 In the matter of: Sumodhur Banerjee eet Petitioner - Versus — The State of West Bengal & Ors. soseRespondents INDEX SLNo. Description of the documents Annexure | Pages 1 Writ Petition L- 17 2. Xerox copy of the entire Original! P-1 [}%—13 Application being O.A. No.637 of 2021 with all annexures 3. | Copy of the order dated 22.04.2022 P-2 AG 4. |Xerox copy of the order dated] P3 |e ~56 03.11.2022 and 02.12.2022 3. [Xerox copy of the order dated] P-4 S¥ 12.06.2023 i _ iz SHORT LIST OF DATES 2021 : The Original Application being O.A. No.637 of 2021 was filed before the West Bengal State Administrative Tribunal, Salt Lake City, Kolkata. 22.04.2022 : The said Original Application being O.A. No. 637 of 2021 was taken up for consideration before the West Bengal State Administrative Tribunal, Salt Lake City, Kolkata. 27.02.2023 : The said Original Application being O.A. No. 59 of 2022 was fixed for hearing before the West Bengal State Administrative Tribunal, Salt Lake City, Kolkata. 03.11.2022 02.12.2022 : ‘The answering respondent failed- to submit reply and the register of the Tribunal extended the time for filing the reply and thereafter again on 01.08.2022 again the matter was taken by the Learned Tribunal and further adjournment was granted and matter has been posted on 21.09.2022. 12.06.2023 7 The answering respondent are taking adjournment and lastly on 12.06.2023 the learned Tribunal posted the matter on 06.12.2023 due to paucity of time and the claim of the petitioner has been frustrated. SYNOPSIS ‘The Original Application being O.A. No.637 of 2021 was filed before the West Bengal State Administrative Tribunal, Salt Lake City, Kolkata and the matter are fixed at such a long intervals that the matter gets listed for hearing and even on those dates the chances of disposal of the matter gets deferred on one or the other trifling grounds and on the prayer of any of the respondents, the matter gets adjourned, it is practically adjourned for that whole year and as a result hereof, the petitioner is being deprived of his right to get speedy and effective justice, and by which their fundamental rights as well as their Constitutional and legal rights are being seriously and grossly affected. Hence, this Writ Petition. 2021 22.04.2022 27.02.2023 03.11.2022 02.12.2022 12.06.2023 LIST OF DATES The Original Application being O.A, No.637 of 2021 was filed before the West Bengal State Administrative Tribunal, Salt Lake City, Kolkata, ‘The said Original Application being O.A. No. 637 of 2021 was taken up for consideration before the West Bengal State Administrative Tribunal, Salt Lake City, Kolkata. ‘The said Original Application being O.A. No. 59 of 2022 was fixed for hearing before the West Bengal State Administrative Tribunal, Salt Lake City, Kolkata. The answering respondent failed to submit reply and the register of the ‘Tribunal extended the time for filing the reply and thereafter again on 01.08.2022 again the matter was taken by the Learned Tribunal and further adjournment was granted and matter has been posted on 21.09.2022. The answering respondent are taking adjournment and lastly on 12.06.2023 the Jearned Tribunal posted the matter ‘on 06.12.2023 due to paucity of time and the claim of the petitioner has been frustrated. I. POINTS OF LAW Whether time and again the answering respondent are taking adjournment and lastly on 12.06.2023 the learned Tribunal posted the matter on 06.12.2023 due to paucity of time and the claim of the petitioner has been frustrated. Whether in the Learned Tribunal the case of the petitioner is getting lingered excessively, unjustifiably and inequitably on one , or the other excuses to the utter frustration on the basis purpose and objective of the Administrative Tribunal Act, 1985. Whether the dates in the said case are fixed at such a long intervals that the matter gets listed for hearing and even on those dates the chances of disposal of the matter gets deferred on one or the other trifling grounds and on the prayer of any of the respondents, the matter gets adjourned, it is practically adjourned for that whole year and as a result hereof, the petitioner is being deprived of his right to get speedy and effective justice, and by which their fundamental rights as well as their Constitutional and legal rights are being seriously and grossly affected. ~Therough Se soi ea DISTRICT: PURULIA IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA CONSTITUTIONAL WRIT JURISDICTION (APPELLATE SIDE) W.P.S.T. NO. of 2023 In the matter of: An Application under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. -AND - In the matter of: Sumodhur Banerjee, son of Goutam Banerjee of Cooks SPOS EEE ECE Ee EEE PrP eran eee — Compound, P.O. Dulmi Nadiha, District ~ Purulia, Pin - 723102. Petitioner -Versus- 1. The State of West Bengal, through the Secretary, Department of Health and Family Welfare, Government of West Bengal, Swasthya Bhawan, GN- 29, Sector ~ V, Salt Lake City, Kolkata - 700091. 2. The Director of Health and Family Welfare, Government of West Bengal, Swasthya Bhawan, GN-29, Sector — V, Salt Lake City, Kolkata — 700091. 3. The Special Secretary, Department of Health and Family Welfare, M.S. Branch, Swasthya Bhawan, GN-29, Sector- V, Salt Lake City, Kolkata -700 091, 4. West Bengal Health Recruitment Board, _service through the Chairman and Chief Executive Officer, office at GN 31, Sector-V, Salt Lake, Kolkata - 700091. 5. Secretary and Controller of Examinations, West Bengal Health Recruitment Board, office at GN 31, Salt Lake, Kolkata 700091. ....Respondents. To The Hon'ble T.S. Sivagnanam, Chief Justice and His Companion Justices of The said Hon’ble Court; ‘The humble petition of the petitioner above named most respectfully: SHEWETH: 1. That your petitioner is a citizen of India and permanently resides at the place mentioned in the cause title of this petition. 2, That your petitioner states that the petitioner filed an application under Section 19 of the Administrative Tribunal Act, 1985 before the Learned Tribunal praying for following relief :~ a) An order directing the respondents, their agents, subordinates and successors, to appoint the applicant as Inspector of Drug in connection with the advertisement no. R/Insp:D/37(1)/2016 dated 22.02.2016 in terms of the order and judgment delivered by the Hon’ble Court in WPST 120 of 2018. b) An order directing the respondents, their agents, subordinates and successors to produce all records and proceedings so that d) 3. conscionable justice may be administered by granting the relief for hereinabove; To pass such other or further orders or orders as to the Hon’ble ‘Tribunal may deem fit and proper; An order do issue directing the respondents, their agents, subordinates and successors to keep one post of Drug inspector vacant till the disposal of the application; ‘That. the case made out in Original Application being ©.A. No.637 of 2021 runs as follows:- a) b) Your applicant states that after obtaining the Bachelor Degree in Pharmacy completed the Master Degree in the respective subject of Pharmacy and since completion of his respective degrees he was working in the specific field of drug manufacturing and/ or testing and your petitioner have more than five years experience in the field. Your applicant states that, the respondent no. 4 herein published an advertisement being No.R/Insp.D/37(1)/2016 dated 22.02.2016 inviting application for recruitment to the posts of Inspector of Drugs under Directorate of Drugs Control under Government of West Bengal. c) Your applicant states that, as per the said advertisement the essential qualifications needed are quoted herein below: A. Essential : i) A Degree in Pharmacy or Pharmaceutical Chemistry or Medicine with specialization in Clinical Pharmacology or Microbiology from a University established in India by Law and ii) Experience of Work in recognized institutions in the manufacture or testing of drugs or enforcement of the provisions of the Drugs and Cosmetics Act, 1940 (23 of 1940) for a minimum total period of five years : Provided that the specialization in Clinical Pharmacology or Microbiology shall -have to be certified by the Dean of the . Faculty of Medicine of the concerned University and the experience in the manufacture of drugs or experience in the ‘Testing of Drugs or experience in the enforcement of the provisions of the Drugs and Cosmetics Act, 1940 (23 of 1940); for a minimum total period of five years has to be certified by the Head of the recognized Institution wherefrom the said experience was obtained.” d) Your applicant states that, since the applicant have the said essential qualifications in response to the above referred hy advertisement the applicant participated in the aforesaid recruitment process and his registration nos. 374494. Your applicant states that, after verification founding eligible he was called for interview for the said recruitment process. Your applicant states that, after interview was over on or about 1 2.05.2017 he is waiting for the result for said recruitment, but till date no disclosure of the result was made. That some candidates who participated in the selection process moved an original application before the Hon’ble Tribunal with a prayer inter alia for passing an appropriate order or direction commanding the respondents and each of them and/or their competent authorities to publish the result of all participated candidates upon preparing and/or adjudging their merit in an appropriate, suitable and rotational method of marks distribution and the said OA was dismissed on merit by an order dated 27.09.2018 and challenging the decision of the Learned Tribunal, appropriate application was filed before the Hon ble High Court and the said writ application was disposed of by an order dated 28.01.2020. After issuance of the said advertisement and prior to conduct the process of selection, the board took a decision to assess the job aspirants on the basis of additional experience (10 marks) d k) ) and working experience in Government sector (5 marks) in addition to assessing candidature on the basis of academic qualification (40 marks), experience (30 marks) and interview (15 marks) and allotting marks to each candidate out of total 100 marks instead of 85 marks. That distribution of marks in the manner decided by West Bengal Health Recruitment Board’ in its 96 meeting amounted to change in the rules in the instant recruitment process. ‘That a writ petition which was moved before the Hon’ble High court being W.P.S.T. 120 of 2018 wherein the Hon’ble High Court passed an order dated 28.01.2020 directing the State Government to appoint the applicant as ‘Inspector of Drugs’ considering the marks for additional experience (10 marks) and marks for Government experience (5 marks) are incorrect. ‘That applicant’s case stands in the same footing Although, he was in the eligible list but due to change of rules as decided by the board in its 96" meeting, applicant could not come to the zone of consideration. That the applicant came to know from reliable source that, he secured more marks than the writ applicant viz. Avijit Das, Suman Goswami and Bhaskar Das. ‘That the applicant made representation before the respondent to consider his case in the light of the Judgment/ order dated 28.01.2020 passed but the Hon’ble Court, but till date no action has been taken by the respondent. That the prayer of the applicant has been kept unattended and thus respondents acted in deviation of the principle of natural justice. ‘That the applicant is entitled to be appointed as inspector of Drugs being a successful candidate and as his case stands at same footing, ‘That Due to COVID-19 pandemic situation, the applicant could not approach in time and such delay in approaching the Learned Tribunal ventilating his grievance be condoned for the interest of justice. Xerox copy of the entire Original Application being O.A. No.637 of 2021 with all annexures is annexed herewith and marked as Annexure “P-1", 4. ‘That the original application was filed within statutory time and ‘on 22.04.2022 the Original Application was admitted and direction for filing reply and rejoinder was passed and matter was directed to be listed on the next date of hearing. Copy of the order dated 22.04.2022 is annexed herewith and marked as Annexure “P-2”. 5. That on 29.06.2022 the answering respondent failed to submit reply and the register of the Tribunal extended the time for filing the reply and thereafter again on 01.08.2022 again the matter was taken by the Learned Tribunal and further adjournment was granted and matter has been posted on 21.09.2022. + 08.9092 oh ope 2022. Xerox copy of the order dated 08. bt.202% and 02.12.2022 are x annexed herewith and marked as Annexure “P-3”. 6. That time and again the answering respondent are taking adjournment and lastly on 12.06.2023 the learned Tribunal posted the matter on 06.12.2023 due to paucity of time and the claim of the petitioner has been frustrated. Xerox copy of the order dated 12.06.2023 is annexed hereto and marked as Annexure P-4. 7. ‘That in the Learned Tribunal the case of the petitioner is getting lingered excessively, unjustifiably and inequitably on one or the other excuses to the utter frustration on the basis purpose and objective of the Administrative Tribunal Act, 1985. 8. That the dates in the said case are fixed at such a long intervals Ural the imatler gets listed for hearing and even on those dates the chances of disposal of the matter gets deferred on one or the other 10 trifling grounds and on the prayer of any of the respondents, the matter gets adjourned, it is practically adjourned for that whole year and as a result hereof, the petitioner is being deprived of his right to get speedy and effective justice, and by which their fundamental rights as well as their Constitutional and legal rights are being seriously and grossly affected. 9. That your petitioner states that the said Original Application being 0.A. No. 637 of 2021 has been fixed for hearing on 12.06.2023 after the long interval although long interval have already been elapsed from the date of filing of the said Original Application being O.A. No. 637 of 2021. 10. That the Tribunal in the facts and circumstances of the case, ought to have fixed up the date of hearing expeditiotisly for effective adjudication of the same otherwise the petitioner will be denied of justice for no fault of its own and will be scriously prejudiced. 11, That your petitioner states that due to fixation of the matter being 0.A. No. 637 of 2021 in the long gap the petitioner is suffering mentally a lot as such the Learned Bench of the Administrative ‘Tribunal ought to fix up the matter on an urgent basis but the Leaned Tribunal without considering said aspect has been pleased to fix the matter in the month of December which is denial of justice. tL in 12. That unless this Hon’ble Court will be pleased to direct the Learned Tribunal to dispose of the Original Application being O.A. No.637 of 2021 expeditiously by modifying the Order dated 12.06.2023 passed by the Learned Tribunal, your Petitioner will suffer irreparable loss and injury which cannot be compensated in any manner whatsoever. 13, That being aggrieved by and dissatisfied with the impugned Order dated 12.06.2023 passed by the Learned Administrative Tribunal in respect of fixing the matter for hearing in the long gap and to fix up the matter being 0.A. No.637 of 2021 for expeditious hearing, your petitioner beg to move this writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India in this Hon'ble Court on the following amongst other:- GROUNDS For that the original application was filed within statutory time and on 22.04.2022 the Original Application was admitted and direction for filing reply and rejoinder was passed and matter was directed to be listed on the next date of hearing. For that on 29.06.2022 the answering respondent failed to submit reply and the register of the Tribunal extended the time for filing it. WV. 12 the reply and thereafter again on 01.08.2022 again the matter was taken by the Learned Tribunal and further adjournment was granted and matter has been posted on 21.09.2022. For that time and again the answering respondent are taking adjournment and lastly on 12.06.2028 the learned Tribunal posted the matter on 06.12.2023 due to paucity of time and the claim of the petitioner has been frustrated. For that in the Learned Tribunal the case of the petitioner is getting lingered excessively, unjustifiably and inequitably on one or the other excuses to the utter frustration on the basis purpose and objective of the Administrative Tribunal Act, 1985. ’For that the dates in the said case are fixed at such a long intervals that the matter gets listed for hearing and even on those dates the chances of disposal of the matter gets deferred on one or the other trifling grounds and on the prayer of any of the respondents, the matter gets adjourned, it is practically adjourned for that whole year and as a result hereof, the petitioner is being deprived of his right to get speedy and effective justice, and by which their fundamental rights as well as their Constitutional and legal rights are being seriously and grossly affected. Vi. Vit. vol. Ix. 13 For that the said Original Application being 0.A, No. 637 of 2021 has been fixed for hearing on 12.06.2023 after the long interval although long interval have already been elapsed from the date of filing of the said Original Application being 0.A. No. 637 of 2021. For that the Tribunal in the facts and circumstances of the case, ought to have fixed up the date of hearing expeditiously for effective adjudication of the same otherwise the petitioner will be denied of justice for no fault of its own and will be seriously prejudiced. For that due to fixation of the matter being 0.A. No. 637 of 2021 in the long gap the petitioner is suffering mentally a lot as such the Learned Bench of the Administrative Tribunal ought to fix up the matter on an urgent basis but the Leaned Tribunal without considering said aspect has been pleased to fix the matter in the month of December which is denial of justice. For that unless this Hon’ble Court will be pleased to direct the Learned Tribunal to dispose of the Original Application being 0.A. No.637 of 2021 expeditiously by modifying the Order dated 4 12.06.2023 passed by the Learned Tribunal, your Petitioner will suffer irreparable loss and injury which cannot be compensated in any manner whatsoever. 14. That there is no other alternative legal efficacious and speedy remedy than to move a writ application under Article 226 of the Constitution of India and seek appropriate relief, The remedy sought for if granted would be full adequate and complete. 15. There are no latches on the part of the petitioner in moving the instant petition and the balance of convenience and/or inconveniences is in favour of passing of the order, as prayed for herein by the petitioner. 16. That the petitioner made representations before the concerned authority and that representation should be taken as demand for justice and further making demand for justice would be nothing but an empty formality. 17. That the record of this case is lying within the jurisdiction of this Hon’ble Court. 15 18. That no such writ application was moved before this Hon’ble Court in the self same cause of action. 19. That this application is made bonafide and for the ends of justice. In the circumstances, your petitioner humbly pray that your Lordships would graciously be pleased to pass the following orders: a) A writ of or in the nature of Mandamus do issue directing the tribunal without_— giving any unnecessary adjournment by modifying the order dated 12.06.2023 and to dispose of the Original Application within a specific time period which the Hon’ble Court may deem fit and proper. b) A _writ of or in the nature of Certiorari do issue calling upon the respondents and each of them to certify and transmit to this court the original records of the case before this Hon’ble 16 Court so that conscionable justice may rendered. <) A writ of or in the nature of Prohibition do issue prohibiting upon the respondents and each of them either by themselves or through their men, agents, assigns, subordinates from exercising further not warranted under the statute. qd) Rule of N IS I in terms of prayers (a) to (c) as above; e) If no cause or insufficient causes are shown Rule be made absolute; ) Ad interim order of injunction restraining the Learned ‘Tribunal to give unnecessary adjournment by modifying the order dated 12.06.2023 till the disposal of the writ petition. hy And pass such other further order or orders as to Your Lordship may seems fit and proper. And your petitioner, as in duty bound, shall ever pray. g. 13%... years, by faith — Hindu, by occupation — Saami.e&e 17 AFFIDAVIT I, Sumodhur Banerjee, son of Goutam Banerjee, aged about ., residing at Cooks Compound, P.O, Dulmi Nadiha, District - Purulia, Pin — 723102, do hereby solemnly affirm and say as follows: - 1, That I am the petitioner in the instant writ application and I am well acquainted with the facts and circumstances of the case and I am competent to affirm this affidavit. 2. That the statement made in paragraphs 5 — § are true to my knowledge and rest are my humble submissions before this Hon'ble Court. Semncthy [ane je Prepared in my office The deponent is known tome. &. pay Udder SAhs oo Marwan te F16enn Clerk to: - Solemnly affirmed before me on Advocate this the 44 (kday of July, 2023. Commissioner. 1 certify all annexure are legible ivocate Taney dich Nv yo i) IN THE WEST BENGAL STATE ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL BIKASH BHAWAN, SALT LAKE CITY, KOLKATA - 700 091, An application under section 19 of the Administrative ‘Tribunal Act, 1985, O. A. No. OF 2021; In the matter of: Sumodhur Banerjee -Versus- -Applicant ‘The State of West Bengal & Ors. od .». Respondents INDEX SLNo Particulars of documents Annexure Pages 1. | Original Application. 1to 1S 2. |Photocopy of the said advertisement “a le -lg dated 22.02.2016 3. | Photocopies of application form “B* 14 4, | Photocopies of their interview call letters “Cc” 22 | 5. | Xerox copy of the order is annexed hereto “D* Q\-2% 28.01.2020 6. | Xerox copy of the representation made by “E” 2-23 the petitioner ae Dated:- 2021 Sumecthy ponaje Place:- Caleutta Signature of the Applicant (For use of the Tribunal’s office only) Date of Filing:- Date of Registration:~ OR Registration Nos. Registrar, State Administrative Tribunal West Bengal. 4 IN THE WEST BENGAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL, Bikash Bhavan, Salt Li it -700.091 An Application under section 19 of the Administrative ‘Tribunal Act, 1985, Details of the application: Original Application No. of 2021 1. Particular of the Applicant: Sumodhur Banerjee, son of Goutam alot BS Banerjee, of Cooks Compound, P.O. Dulmi Nadiha, District ~ Purulia, Pin — 723102. 2. — Particular of the Respondents: 1, The State of West Bengal, through the Secretary, Department of Health _ and = Family — Welfare, Government of West Bengal, Swasthya Bhawan, GN-29, Sector — V, Salt Lake City, Kolkata - 700091. 2. The Director of Health and Family Welfare, Government of West Bengal, Swasthya Bhawan; GN-29, Seamoalhyy rv 20 Sector - V, Salt Lake City, Kolkata ~ ‘700091. 3. The Special Secretary, Department of Health and Family Welfare, M.S. Branch, Swasthya Bhawan, GN-29, Sector- V, Salt Lake City, Kolkata -700 091. 4. West Bengal Health Recruitment Board, service through the Chairman and Chief Executive Officer, office at GN 31, Sector-V, Salt Lake, Kolkata - 700091 5. Secretary and Controller of Examinations, West Bengal Health Recruitment Board, office at GN 31, Salt Lake, Kolkata . 700091. 3. PARTICULARS OF THE ORDER AGAINST WHICH THE APPLICATION IS MADE: ‘The application is not against any order but against the purported method of marks distribution pattern adopted by the Swoaslhy thew 2) Respondent authorities concerned, more particularly by the respondent nos. 4 and 5, for adjudging the merit of the candidates for selection to the posts of Inspector of drugs under Directorate of Drugs Control pursuant to the Advertisement No. R/Insp.D/37(1)/2016 dated 08.03.2021 of the applicant has not been considered by the respondent no.4 & 5. Such action is contrary to, the law, discriminatory and violates Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution of India, 4, LIMITATION: ‘That the application has been preferred within the period of limitation as prescribed under section 21 of the Administrative ‘Tribunal Act. 5. JURISDICTION OF THE HON’BLE TRIBUNAL: ‘That the subject matter of the instant application falls within the jurisdiction of the Hon’ble Tribunal. 6 FACTS OF THE CASE: a) That the applicant is the law-abiding citizen of India and residing at the address given in the cause title. Sameday Monaje. ») d) 7-2 daa Your applicant states that he after obtaining the Bachelor Degree in Pharmacy completed the Master Degree in the respective subject of Pharmacy. Your applicant craves leave to refer to the academic qualifications of the applicant at the time of hearing of this application. Your applicant states that since completion of their respective degrees they are working in the specific field of drug manufacturing and/ or testing respectively and having more than five years experience in the field. Your applicant states that, the respondent no. 4 herein published an advertisement being No.R/Insp.D/37(1}/2016 dated 22.02.2016 inviting application for recruitment to the posts of Inspector of Drugs under Directorate of Drugs Control under Government of West Bengal. Photocopy of the said advertisement dated 22.02.2016 is annexed hereto and marked as Annexure “A”. Your applicant states that, as per the said advertisement the essential qualifications needed are quoted herein below: A. Essential : Swmaalhy osnegjer i) ii) 23 & A Degree in Pharmacy or Pharmaceutical Chemistry or Medicine with specialization in Clinical Pharmacology or Microbiology from a University established’ in India by Law and Experience of Work in recognized institutions in the manufacture or testing of drugs or enforcement of the provisions of the Drugs and Cosmetics Act, 1940 (23 of 1940) for a minimum total period of five years : Provided that the specialization in Clinical Pharmacology or Microbiology shall .have to be certified by the Dean of the. Faculty of Medicine of the concerned University and the experience in the manufacture of drugs or experience in the Testing of Drugs or experience in the enforcement of the provisions of the Drugs and Cosmetics Act, 1940 (23 of 1940); for a minimum total period of five years has to be certified by the Head of the recognized Institution wherefrom. the said experience was obtained." Your applicant states that, since the applicant have the said essential qualifications in response to the above referred advertisement the applicant participated in the aforesaid recruitment process and his registration _nos. IRAANS Shesvacdhay ibenayjes 8) h) ae Photocopies of application form are annexed hereto and collectively marked as Annexure “B”. Your applicant states that, after verification founding eligible Re vaso ; they were called for interview for the said recruitment process, Photocopy of the interview call letter is annexed hereto and marked as Annexure “C*. Your applicant states that, after interview was over on or about 1 2.05.2017 he is waiting for the result for said recruitment, but till date no disclosure of the result was made. That some candidates who participated in the selection process moved an original application before the Hon'ble ‘Tribunal with a prayer inter alia for passing an appropriate order or direction commanding the respondents and each of them and/or their competent authorities to publish the result of all participated candidates upon preparing and/or adjudging their merit in an appropriate, suitable and rotational method of marks distribution and the said OA was dismissed on merit by an order dated 27.09.2018 and challenging the decision of the Learned Tribunal, appropriate 25 application was filed before the Hon'ble High Court and the said writ application was disposed of by an. order dated 28.01.2020 with following direction : - We, therefore, hold that the tribunal was not justified in rejecting the claims of the applicant 1, 3 and 4. The State Government is directed to appoint the applicant 1, 3 and 4 as inspector of drugs immediately but not later than a fortnight from date of receipt of a copy of this order. ‘The dates of appointment of the applicant 1, 3 and 4 shall relate back to the date on which candidates in the merit list, who secured marks equal to or lesser than the applicant 1, 3 and 4, came to be appointed. Such applicant shall not be entitled to any arrears of financial benefits but benefits shall flow to them on and from the dates of appointment. However, the period during which the applicant 1, 3 and 4 could not discharge duty as inspectors of drugs shall be counted for the purpose of calculating their qualifying service for pension and other benefits, which would have accrued to them but for the delayed appointments. Insofar as seniority in service is concerned, however, they shall rank below the candidates already appointed. Se why Pras aces i) 26 Be it placed on record that we have resisted ourselves from interfering with the selection process as a whole since the private respondents have already been appointed and working as inspectors of drugs for quite some time, and also that ‘because there are vacancies where the applicant 1, 3 and 4 can be accommodated. List the writ petition on 11t February, 2020 for consideration of the claims of the applicant 2 and 5. It is made clear that similar relief granted to the applicant 1, 3 and 4 may be extended to the applicant 2 and 5, should they succeed in their claim that they had requisite experience and were thus eligible for consideration of their candidature. Xerox copy of the order is annexed hereto 28.01.2020 is annexed herewith and marked as Annexure “D”. After issuance of the said advertisement and prior to conduct the process of selection, the board took a decision to assess the job aspirants on the basis of additional experience (10 marks) and working experience in Government sector (5 marks) in addition to assessing candidature on the basis of academic qualification (40 marks), experience (30 marks) and interview (15 marks) and allotting marks to each candidate out of total 100 marks instead of 85 marks. Sol! hg fou, ) d 2F That distribution of marks in the manner decided by West Bengal Health Recruitment Board’ in its 96 meeting amounted to change in the rules in the instant recruitment process, That a writ petition which was moved before the Honorable High court being W.P.S.T. 120 of 2018 wherein the Honorable High Court passed an order dated 28,01.2020 directing the State Government to appoint the applicant as ‘Inspector of Drugs’ considering the marks for additional experience (10 marks) and marks for Government experience (5 marks) are incorrect. That applicant's case stands in the same footing Although, he was in the eligible list but due to change of rules as decided by the board in its 96" meeting, applicant could not come to the zone of consideration. That the applicant came to know from reliable source that, he secured more marks than the writ applicant viz. Avijit Das, Suman Goswami and Bhaskar Das. That the applicant made representation before the respondent to consider his case in the light of the Judgment/ order dated 28.01.2020 passed but the Hon'ble Court, but till date no action has been taken by the Sue volley Rane 9) P) L ie 28 * 10 respondent. That the prayer of the applicant has been kept unattended and thus respondents acted in deviation of the principle of natural justice. Xerox copy of the representation made by the applicant is annexed herewith and marked as Annexure “E”. ‘That the applicant is entitled to be appointed as inspector of Drugs being a successful candidate and as his case stands at same footing. That Due to COVID-19 pandemic situation, the applicant could not approach in time and such delay in approaching the Learned Tribunal ventilating his grievance be condoned for the interest of justice. Grounds with legal provisions: For that there is no rationality in distribution of marks and the allocation of 45 marks out of 100 for experience is excessive, illegal, arbitrary and there is no rationality in distribution of marks for experience since experience cannot substitute merit. For that the applicant states that since in the rules framed by the Government of West Bengal as well as in the rules framed by the Central Government there is no indication that higher Srrwclhy Bonner mn. Vi. 27 n experience is a qualification, the method of distribution of marks of 45 out of 100 is illegal, arbitrary, unreasonable and cannot be sustained both from the points of law as well as from the points of facts. For that under Rule 49 of the Drugs and Cosmetics Rules 1945 there is no indication that greater weightage should be given to experience of more than 5 years, That the Hon’ble Court by the order 28.01.2020 has already Aves decided the issue and the applicant is entitled to #& similar relief as he is situated in the similar and identical circumstances. For that after issuance of the said advertisement and prior to conduct the process of selection, the board took a decision to assess the job aspirants on the basis of additional experience (10 marks) and working experience in Government sector (5 marks) in addition to assessing candidature on the basis of academic qualification (40 marks), experience (30 marks) and interview (15 marks) and allotting marks to each candidate out of total 100 marks instead of 85 marks. For that distribution of marks in the manner decided by West Bengal Health Recruitment Board’ in its 96 meeting amounted to change in the rules in the instant recruitment process. Sramealhy foasrarjer vu. Vill. Zo 12 For that That a writ petition which was moved before the Honorable High court being W.P.S.T. 120 of 2018 wherein the Honorable High Court passed an order dated 28.01.2020 directing the State Government to appoint the applicant as ‘Inspector of Drugs’ considering the marks for additional experience (10 marks) and marks for Government experience (5 marks) are incorrect. For that applicant’s case stands in the same footing Although, he was in the eligible list but due to change of rules as decided by the board in its 96" meeting, applicant could not come to the zone of consideration. That the applicant came to know from reliable source that, he secured more marks than the writ applicant viz. Avijit Das, Suman Goswami and Bhaskar Das. For that the applicant made representation before the respondent to consider his case in the light of the Judgment/ order dated 28.01.2020 passed but the Hon’ble Court, but till date no action has been taken by the respondent. That the prayer of the applicant has been kept unattended and thus respondents acted in deviation of the principle of natural justice. For that the applicant is entitled to be appointed as inspector of Drugs being a successful candidate and as his case stands at same footing. Sree ny boavajes 10. 2) & Matters previously not _and/ or pending before any other 13 Hon’ble Court or Tribunal: ‘That the applicant has not preferred any other application on the self same facts or cause of action before any other Hon’ble Court or Tribunal nor any such application is pending. Details of the Remedies Exhausted: That your applicant states that the applicant has made several verbal as well as written representations before the respondents, but nothing has been done by the respondents till date for redressal of the genuine grievance of your applicant. ‘That a purported decision have been passed by the respondents and against the same your applicant has no other alternative remedy, but to prefer the instant application. Relief Sought For: An order directing the respondents, their agents, subordinates and successors, to appoint the applicant as Inspector of Drug in connection with the advertisement no. R/Insp.D/37(1)/2016 dated 22.02.2016 in terms of the order Srewoaltoy Boawafes b) 11. 12. Z2— and judgment delivered by the Hon’ble Court in WPST 120 of 2018. An order directing the respondents, their agents, subordinates and successors to produce all records and proceedings so that conscionable justice may be administered by granting the relief for hereinabove; To pass such other or further orders or orders as to the Hon’ble Tribunal may deem fit and proper; Interim Order, If Ar ed For: Pending disposal of the main application, the applicant prays for following interim orders: An order do issue directing the respondents, their agents, subordinates and successors to keep one post of Drug inspector vacant till the disposal of the application; Enclosures: Annexure “A” to “E”. soll fon. 22 15 VERIFICATION I, Sumodhur Banerjee, son of Goutam Banerjee, aged about 35. years, by faith-Hindu, by occupation- Service, residing at Cooks Compound, P.O. Dulmi Nadiha, District - Purutia, Pin - 723102, do hereby solemnly affirm and say that I being applicant of the instant application to verify this application and I verify that the contents of paragraph nos. 1to _are true to my knowledge and belief and rests are my respectful submission before this Hon'ble Tribunal and I have not suppressed any material fact: Place : Kolkata Date: 31.08.2023. Ss amet Rann aja Signature of the Applicant Identified by me Advocate. To The Registrar West Bengal State Administrative Tribunal Salt Lake City, Calcutta. West Bengal 1igaith Recruitment Board BENFISH TOWER ( 2 & 2" Floor} GN31, Sector, de take, Kolkata ~ 700091 pwbhrbin Ad No i ap.0/BMBVIOIS Recrultment to tha post of Inspoctoiiéy prugs under Directorate of Drugs control ‘rane appbatons or riled fem lncan Cizen sian ober nao. 28 dace elghia by Govemant ole eds taveen 25.2 20160 09.03:2016 {halo BPM): Tareas ne andnecaseary pases inte towns pxmarphs ‘Acandidate should very from the nated ndes natrne is igi The coon prescribed: cannot be relaxed, The tenia be made by sleston but her a gibir fppeatees ae race, a8 a asutof Abeta, ‘ha Board may forthe purpose of short sng hold ph paaminaton, H ‘Seale of Pay: Rs. 15500 — Rs. 42000! { Grade Ba Rs. 5400+). Other allowances ‘ill also be admissible 33 per Cerrar ein ea, ‘ " Antcpated Vacances Taz Post | Unrssared {lispedaeof rae [48 BE Gategoy [PHO [ Tout é a8 aE CaegenyA leno sie) rs ‘uaitcaton: A asa: 3 a A Degree In Pharmacy.or Phagnacevilcal Chemistry or Medielne wih: specialization In Cinical Pamacsiony or Mba fg Ulesty sahshedln aby Law and B—_Expetenca of workin tudo in the ranula testing of gs or enoremeat the pons of he Dn Cosme 04 ff} re man pdt yeas Provided thatthe Gj Ciked Pramaccogy or Nkzobidony shat have toi ented by the Dean of to Facity sfledcne ofthe concemed Unlversty ad the expetenes inthe manufac of gs or epee nthe Testeg of ngs ar expesance athe enoesar of is ‘rovers of to Orgs and Cites Ac, 940 (23 of 1940) fora mini ll pete We Year has tobe cried yg} a ecogrizes etuion wre sal extoce ‘was bane. ‘Scanned with CamScanner of Orgs contol, Heath & Fane Deptt; - ee nat may ban 38 Yet 380% Jarry 201 age boa sre cnt perversely Jat: NAcooommet sonic cha pone nee aed deals aa roa 8 ye be £6 ST nga ye nk 3 Ye er OBC ana We ng ‘septs year sr ars hoa pyaar at om ote: 1) Tgpteant muse zen logan lpn let anally a dere aby Covenant at 2) ge As cated Nahar ea aw cD see 83) The chaln of candidates for relaxation of Seas 4 permanent Cov, employee should bs'ptoved by & cartileate from the appointing author hoving te pelod of hl her continuous service under ‘Government «f Wes! Bengal, ‘Fea: Canales rst subst he eppleatn foo among io RE. 210 (Rupoos two hundked ton) tough, are ‘curr a any rene of Bane parting In the GRBs ( Govt. Race Portal System }, Govt ot Wost Banga uch Speman seni arene Frm, Gav. Roca Head of cours “0058-00104. aon. Ieny pleat be noted that aftr paymont te Dank; Gundlatos have t lg Int the webstt:with the fog inID & Password lead provided to thom alter esltatit ough SMSF Einall fr payentvartéatin and fed up festpartn ofthe applcalion form, sont i aka, a ei ‘No appcaton wll be considered nla accompanied wi he aque application ie. exrapag Candies beige to SOIT exagty.of West Bengal and persona wih tallies sped indir deabes rl, 1009 (atcale-cisned tele te Averzement dle) who donc req to pay ye. Such exeopon off, aover, not applcabeto any ‘08 (eagey Aor 8) candle. : cin fore ofthe fo wtb enertined rr wi hts eared ray ober einnaon, ‘eplaionsallbo mad athe forma, 0 eval, in aes! Bega Heal Reenivnen Board Webse (aru mth hy ‘ese te hn clsng dle shale ee, la cas, ay of he statement mada lathe aprcaton 5 soseuenty foun tobe win a Rnowege of the ‘cantidales, his! her candidature wil be lable 10 canedlfalon, and even Wt appolied to-a post onthe reste’ of this, ed, Will supprestion et any mata Tact wl lo ba nly Cankstes shoud take particular note that ens in UB appicaon submited tthe Bodrd mist be made exreciy ‘pint al the lems whlch wil be keated as fel and naggbefaon aid ‘additon ints regard wil be éntetaged ater full ‘ssn of he appcaten;Appteation not ui Med iygound compete ordelectve kang respec of wiht fe wl alae rejection, Candas must full the ossentatqualetion by ‘Alnsmaienegatdng selection recumant (date o ‘ofmme he the Board Website at worwawbhrt In. shag date, on, date of interviow etc} tothe post wil be avalible, te et roqul - ®) Keane &. 3 certicale i: supp of hither. cil from 3 cmpetent auhonty of fal ates sca ab igaiho West Cogateant ‘STs (Wsndicallon) At, 1994 and ‘8C5/5TS Watlare Department order No. 261cTIer/M 10084 dat 09.04.1905 road wth 8.0.0. Delt. Créer Now 8320-BCHIMR-84/10 dated 24.09.2010]: ‘Scanned with CamScanner + Inthe ot ns Min Kota, coe Mamttlos or iat Member oF $e sig one ors Parson wit slit Wl be antral fer submission ofthe application, (2) Persons with Disabilides (Physica Nodtal Board jo West Bana Participation) Rules, 1996) (©) Tho West Bengal Health Recaitmenl aa candoans asia larnereaon Originat Cortifcates relating to Aiaabilly (40% and above) wit have to bow fumish any certificate of any oer folevant certicat trom an appropriata 40 ar ahve Just ay acral em an por sates (Equal Oppartas, require such futher prot or pares from the aaa neues rogues oS. tral), age, qualcalions, catle (SCASTIBC), Physical ae te WSHRE ask or tem. Hany candle Fs entor Information relaing fo Nether candidature win the lone specied by the Board hier da fey oti maybe passed over witout urber reference to hiner. A candidate should note that hiss hee ‘Subjoct fo determination af his/her ef appointment a candidate i found hi cancelled without further reference Canvassing: Any attompt an the pat o on to the Examination! itorviaw willbe daemed provisfons! respects I atany stig even ata Issue of a tar of Ee i ereninaten hare eanciatte wil be Important Dates: Website Link open ~ Far orvline Rogisiraion of Applications. "28.02.2016 to 09.08.2016 ( belore 6 PM). Payton f Fes at Baik rach (OF a) GEOSZOTSTS THUS 2OTG (op to bankaghoars). THOR ZOIBT Btano SPY. ask dal ofa subieston of Form Note: : closing date and nat to walt tll the fast date ta avél Internet/website. CCanctites are requested to fallow tho websto fui 22.02.2016 3 ‘candidates are advised Ia thelr own Interest apply using Online Applfeation Form much betore the congestion on Web-Server an‘aécount of heavyload on 1) trom tia to ta for day update ilermation, “Secretary. 8 Contralles of Examinations ‘West Bengal Health Recrultment Board Scanned with CamScanner West Bengal Health Recruitment Board plies lnealecenevant wi 3 a _AesHOWLEDOEMENT SLIP TOR REC og INSPECTOR OF ORUOS UNDER Eton Recast oe rec Dag conn = 7 La eeroner 20S MER ERESTORTEOF RU Ca su ou eqns ee “Raverisemeit No, unas sun OAR Wy Insp-D/S 712016 ome COTM OANERES ne fncebe MARA DANE eae ovate sos ete se Sty tage hives ned hans —— esc ostowt He et coors CNP DULME NADIA FURULLA FURL esr DENGAL 73102 EDUCATIONAL. QUALIFICATION: : Eaatne Spex Usiveniy isi Yer | Pera peanens smuna mya hakan Aa PSST OPTIMUS Sr =H arena bo say coasoctabartreo | EXPERIENCE DETAILS: a St ne of Orgatenlon 7 Hospial/ Medial Cae Peed ofsanice Year iE Fem @onoareen TEAM) ON ani F aa caeaaoI0 7 | ior aREa OMNI Baa ae 7 fr ocaTTAT aa aaa | "indy dest ade iu ona hem apts tes meee nin in 3 abe canto chy cell dm 7 ’ | Srettemat abate ooh bee Inbar nc cc nih ig ello . aba il d seseay cnecid foxtoe 1s inh cums moss err Hug PAmnession ‘Styne fication hand (0) Unit openers nl be manna ea ‘Scanned with CamScanner ~20 = ‘NAME: SUMODITUR BANERIE, rash iSSECTOR OF DRUGS UNDER DIRECTORATE OF brit conTROL | qecisraaTion No: 37496 SHIT: Ds ROLL (TABLE) fo, axap8l (TABLE ®) esr {ADDRES: COOKS COMPOUND 90 DULM WADIA ,PURULIAgURUUIA. Wes Be-723102 ‘bar Gadi, 2 ‘Wi fence our Nobenton No AdveNa, Rep D/I7(2016 ded 22.022016 Fr rerament io th pons of laspestor Drape ide ‘iesonaot Drogeonrl, Health 2 Fanly Walle Depa feat Bengal -yor are blog ald fo Ttevlew, The Interview pecan ate eres eae ee 1h] pesatmirtew | Repere:tie uae cans nae et morn, arta : | of lg forthe np led pst apt cur Advertisement. You sre puso gal ie flowing secessay etna cries long hss of pole f documents daly aaa i ou vedio slender al be rune ek and ieee wil te LY ety Cut erp on Ca AAD deplete naga agin Cue cai ce ofS a on hy ese lope & Gefen a caged abet song wid (6 Hig Qualia, if any ( Cenfate& Mukshee) 2 Coat epics nema GF Svc Enpleye Cereus, any 2 eunteolpmapt i orponoewichote tp patel tyes open rt escent youl cleaned pe ae ec m Nene ette Pet Lapa, Sanne, Cera are rao TWA cme Sree esoinary & Conrller af Eainlnione ‘West egal Meath Reerenen aed Scanned with GamScanner 28.01.2020 co) WPS. 120 0f 2018 Avijit Das and Ors. yerous- ‘The State of West Bengal and Ors, Mr. P.S. Bhattacharya, Mr. Uday Narayan Betal......::For the petitioners. Mr. Kishore Datta, ‘apan Kumar Muldherjee, Mr. Somnath Naslear. Mr. Bikash Ranjan Neogi, Ms. Ananya Neogt, Mz. Guddu Singh.. ‘For the respondent nos. 6 to 80. Affidavit in reply filed by the petitioners shall be retained with the records, ‘The petitioners had responded to an advertisement dated February 22, 2016 issued by the West Bengal Health Recruitment Board (hereafter ‘the Board) inviting online applications from eligible candidates for appointment on 88 (cighty-eight) poste of Inspector of Drugs under the Directorate of Drugs Control, ‘West Bengal. They were unsuccessflll in their pursuit to obtaln employment as Such, and approached the West Bengal Administrative Tribunal (hereafter the tribunal) by presenting ©.A. 1046 of 2017. In such application, inter alla, the following relief was sought: c. Pass an appropriate order or direction commanding the respondents and each of them and/or their competent authorities to forthwith to adopt appropriate, suitable and rotational method of marks distribution pattem for adjudging the merit of the candidates for selection to the posts of Inspector of Drugs under Directorate of Drugs Control as per the Advertisement No. R/Insp.D/37(1)/2016 dated 22.02.2016 by abandoning, the advertisement marks distribution pattern, so that the most deserving and meritorious candidates should be appointed hy that process; ‘The tribunal, at the time of admission of the original application, by its order dated November 29, 2017 granted interim relief and thereby stayed the ~21- process of sclection. The respondents were restrained from offering appointment to the empaneled candidates without obtaining prior leave of the tribunal. An application was filed by the respondents (M.A. 112 of 2018) seeking leave to appoint 52 (fifty-two) selected candidates, Such application was heard by the tribunal along with the original application. Upon final hearing, the original application stood dismissed by a judgment and order dated September 27, 2018. ‘The only ground on which the original application failed before the tribunal was that the petitioners had taken a chance of selection and having failed to succeed, could not have turned around and challenged the selection process discovering that the result was not palatable to them. Such judgment and order is the subject matter of challenge in this writ petition. Out of the five petitioners, there is no dispute that the petitioners 1, 3 and 4 full the eligibility criteria for selection, However, there is serious dispute with regard to the qualifications of the petitioners 2 and 5 qua experience. We wish to deal with the claims of the petitioners 2 and 5 on a different date, since the parties have prayed for time to retum better prepared. So far as the petitioners 1, 3 and 4 are concerned, we have heard the parties on the merits of their respective claims. It appears that the qualifications for appointment on the posts of inspector of drugs have been laid down by rules framed under Article 909 of the Constitution of India, notified vide memo dated December 3, 1965, it has since been amended by memo dated August 27, 2001. Originally, it was the Public Service Commission, West Bengal that was entrusted with the task of conducting the process of selection but subsequently, with the constitution of the Board by the Health and Family Welfare Department of the State Government vide notification dated August 1, 2012, published in the Kolkata Gazette dated September 12, 2012, the Board is now the body entrusted with the functions of conducting the process of selection and recommending appointment, inter alia, on the posts of inspector of drugs. Such notification at sub-paragraph 1 paragraph C ordains that the “existing recruitment rules for each category of the posts will remain valid mutatis mutandis until further order’ and the Board “will select candidates as per these recruitment rules", Surprisingly, the Board in its 96% meeting held on April 21, 2017, Le., aftes advertisement dated February 22, 2016 was issued pureuant whereto the petitioners had responded, toole a decision in respect of distribution of marks as follows: ‘The issue of distribution of marks for the selection process in connection with the direct recruitment to the posts of Inspector of Drugs under Directorate of Drugs Control under the Health & Family Welfare Department, Government of West Bengal, waa taken up and the Board unanimously decided the marks distribution pattern as follows: Marks distribution for Inspector of Drugs A Degree a. Pharmacy ‘b, Pharmaceutical Chemistry & Medicine with epecialization in Clinical Pharmacclogy ‘4 Microbiology i) a) Experience of work in recognized Institutions) fora minimum total period of five years im the markiacture r/testing of drugs or fenforeement of the provisions of the Drugs and Cosmetics Act, 1940 (23 of 1940) b) Addl. Experience in excess of 5 years (per year § : maximum 10) 10 Working experience with Govt. (For 1 year or more) 05 iv) Interview 15 (bold in original) Im pursuance of the notification dated August 1, 2012, the Board was fequired to assess cach candidate and embark on selection based on the Rules framed under Article 309 of the Constitution. Such mules, however, speak of only academic qualifications, experience and age. Intriguingly, no particular procedure of selection is postulated by such rules. The advertisement dated February 22, 2016 was also silent in respect of the procedure for selection. To our mind, if the Board had restricted assessment of each candidate on the basis of bis academic qualification, experience and performance in interview, the same would have been @ plausible course of action since interview (though not epecified in the rules) is a well-recognized method of selection and is often resorted to for assessing the personality of a job aspirant, Additionally, though not so specifically provided, interview of the candidates conducted by the Board could not have been impeached by any of the petitioners since upon receiving the call letters, none of them objected to the same and they appeared at such interview without any demur, Although it is not for the courts to re-determine the ‘appropriate method of selection, we arc inclined to the view that after issuance of the advertisement and immediately, prior to conducting the process of selection, the Board ought not to have taken a décision to assess the job aspirants on the basis of additional experience (10 marks) and working experiance with the Government (§ marks) in addition to assessing their candidature on the basis of their academic qualifications (40 marks), experience (90 marks) and interview (15 marks), and allotting marks to cach candidate out of a total of ‘100’ marks instead of 85’ marks, Distribution of marks in the manner decided by the Board in its 96% mecting amounted to a change in the rules of the game after the game had started, which is impermissible having regard to the decision in K, ‘Manjusree vs. State of A.P., reported in (2008) 3 SCC 512. In our opinion, the Board's jurisdiction having been limited by the notification dated August 1, 2022, it could not have acted beyond the boundaries set by the notification constituting it. In that view of the matter, allotment of marks for additional experience (10 marks) and working experience with the Government (6 marks) in favour of the candidates who were appointed on the posts of inspector of drugs, was absolutely illegal, The petitioners were not informed at any stage of the process that the Board had decided to award marke for additional experience and working experience with the Government and, therefore, it was nota case where the petitioners had taken a chance of selection and having failed to get selected, eurned around to challenge the process of selection, We have, therefore, proceaded to assess the merits of the petitioners qua the candidates who have since been appointed on the basis of a total of 85 marks, instead of 100" marks. From the records, it has been found that the petitioners 1, 9 and 4 scored 178, 78.5 and 79 marks out of ’85' marks, respectively. Such maria obtained by the petitioners 1, 9 and 4 out of a total of "85" marka are moré than the marks obtained by a number of candidates who have since been appointed. However, before we proceed to consider as to whether the petitioners 1, 3 and 4.are entitled to any relief, we ought to examine the reason assigned by the tribunal for dismissal of the original application. It is na doubt true that the petitioners participated in the process of aclection without demur and had assailed the-result thereof only when they were not suecessful in entering the zone of consideration for public employment. Pertinently, at no stage prior to declaration of results of selection were the petitioners 1, 9 and 4, or for that ratter the petitioners 2 and 5, informed that they would be assessed not only on the basis of academic qualifications, experience and interview, but also on the ‘basis of additional experience and working experience with the Governiment, The petitioners were all along under the impression that not only they but the other aspirants’ candidature would be assessed and marks allotted for academic quolifcations and experience, and perhaps interview once they were called therefor, Since the petitioners 1, 3 and'4 had no prior knowledge of a departure from the preseribed procedure being made by the Board in that marke were allotted for additional experience and experience in working with the Government, they could not have laid a challenge td such departure from the Procedure prior to the results being declared, No material has been shown to establish that the petitioners did have such a prior knowledge. The decision of the tribunal appears to be in the tecth of the recent decision of the Supreme Court in Civil Appeal No, 9482 of 2019 : Dr. (Major) Mecta Sahai vs. State of Bihar & ors. (2028 SCC OnLine SC 1632]. tn Meeta Sahaf (supra), thas been hheld that the principle (noticed in paragraph 16) aust be differentiated for those candidates, who by agreeing to participate in the aelection process only accept the prescribed procedure and not the illegality in following such procedure. In a situation where a candidate alleges misconstruction of statutory rules and ‘discriminating consequences arising therefrom, the same cannot be condoned merely because a candidate has partalcen in it, ‘Similar view taken by the tribunal earlier while epurning a challenge to selection process which was initiated and conducted in departure from the Presoribed procedure, did not receive the approval of this Court in Md, Zakir Hossain ve, The State of West Bengal & ors, reported in (2019) 6 WBLR 225. We, therefore, hold that the tribunal was not justified in rejecting the claims of the petitioners 1, 3 and 4. ‘The State Government is directed to appoint the petitioners 1, 3 and 4 as inspector of drugs immediately but not later than a fortnight from date of receipt of a copy ofthis order. ‘The dates of appointment of the petitioners 1, 3 and 4 shall relate back to the date on which candidates in the merit lst, who secured marks equal to or lesser than the petitioners 1, 3 and 4, came to be appointed. Such petitioners shall not be entitled to any szrears of financial beneiite but benefits shall flow to them on and from the dates of appointment, However, the period during which the petitioners 1, 3 and 4 could not discharge duty as inspectors of druge shall be counted for the purpose of calculating their qualifying service for pension and other benefits, which would have accrued to them but for the delayed ‘appointments. Insofar as seniority in service is concemed, however, they shall rank below the candidates already appointed. Be it placed on record that we have resisted ourselves from interfering with the selection process as a whole since the private respondents have already been. appointed and working as inspectors of drugs for quite some time, and slso that because there are vacancies where the petitionere 1, 3 and 4 can be ‘accommodated. List the writ petition on L1% February, 2020 for consideration of the claims of the petitioners 2 and 5. It is made clear that similar relief granted to the Petitioners 1, 3 and 4 may be exteniled to the petitioners 2 and 5, should they ‘succeed in their claim that they had requisite experience and were thus eligible for consideration of their candidature, (DIPANKAR DATTA, 3.) (PROTIK PRAKASH BANERJEE, J.) -Qz- 1 _ The secretary : 4 eal & Farly Welfare Department Government of West Bengal, swasthya shawan (29, SectonY, Salt Lake, Kalats-700091. 2, Tha secretary TREGEIVED ‘West Bengal Health Recrultmient Board ‘' {Conaerts Not Venting) GH 2, Sector, Saletake, Kotata-700051 rectorate of Grogs Conrat 0 MAR 2021 <2 the predor on ' Directorate of Drugs Contot aah as, india Exchange Place Extension Pees IT Building, $* Floor, Kolkata-700073, subject Paves for appolntment as nspecer of uy” ected Sir | MPS Sadhu Sede, csng at cots Compound, PO: Dunia, Dstt: : Pull, West Bengal, Pn: 723102, participated Inthe selection process for appolatment to the post of Tnspector of Orugs’ under ‘The oirectorate of Drugs Controfs My registration nuanber was 374494 and from ‘Unreserved category’ The Rol (able) number was 202391 (Table). 1 made this application In-terms of;the advertisement no R/lnsp.0/37(A)/2016 i dated 22 February 2016 issued by West Bengal fia Recruitment Board and: pilor to conduct the process of selection, the board took 2 decison to assess the Job aspirants on the basis of addtional i ‘emperience (10 marks) and working experience if Government sector {5 marks) In addltion : to asessng candldature on the basis of acadeile qualleaton (40 marks], expertence (30 marks) and Interview (25 marks) and along sacks to each candidate out of total 100 | ‘matks instead of 85 marks. % i That distibution of marks In the imafiner decided by ‘West Bengal Heath i Recrultment Boar inits 96" meeting amounted change fa the rues of the game, Some canditates who patkipated inthe Interew moved before the state ‘Adrloltative Tribunal but the tribunal did’ Iitéfare with the decision ofthe board. That a wit petition wat moved before the Honorable High court belng W.P.S.T. 120 of 2018 wherein the Honorable High Court passed an order dvacting the State Government to appolnt the petitioners as ‘Inspector of Orgs’ considering the marks for addtlonal ‘exoerlenee 10 marks} and marks for Government experlence (5 marks) are legal unthy fauga OOM? Searcy anja avs 08 Hoek 202) ‘Scanned with CamScanner £ oe due to That my case stands same footing. ajtiouteh, I was In the ellgibte ist but of rules as decided by the bel ins a6 meeting I cauld not come to the zone of BE gensiderotlon. | came to knows frrh raltable sousce thoty | secured more marks than the. wit gutioners vi. AVI DBS, Suman swam! aed Bhaskar Das. 2 1n this circumstance, 1, pray before your gosidself to appoint me as “inspector of E> ruge’ belng a successful candidate and a my case stafds at sd footing Oue to COVIO-39 demic situation, | could not'3pproach in time anid such delay:In approaching your good pan ote ventilating my grfevance'be condoned sympathetically. !hope my case would-be considered by yaur gai office In terms of the order passed in W.P-S-T. 120 of 2028 dated 28 January 2020 and shall be highly obliged, % & ‘Yours faithfully Srumnctny fb anager Date: OF Moheh 202] § SUMODHUR BANERJEE, ° 5/0 Goutam Banerjee Cooks Compound PO: DulmiNadiha District: Purulta (West Bengal) Pin: 723102 Enclosure: 1. Copy of W.P.S-T. 120 of 2018 2. Photocopy of admit card ‘Scanned with CamScanner 48 IN THE WEST BENGAL STATE ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL BIKASH BHAWAN, SALT LAKE CITY, KOLKATA - 700 091. An application under section 19 of the Administrative Tribunal Act, 1985. 0. A. NO. OF 2021; In the matter of: Sumodhur Banerjee Applicant -Versus-_ The State of West Bengal & Ors. .. Respondents APPLICATION Tanuja Basak Advocate C/o, Mr. Ekramut Bari, Advocate Bar Association, Room No.-8 High Court, Calcutta. 4 ORDER SHEET 4 4 \r “WEST BENGAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL Bikash Bhavan, Salt Lake, Kolkata — 700 091. nt- ‘The Hon’ble Justice Soumitra Pal, Chairman The Hon’ble Sayeed Ahmed Baba, Administrative Member Case No. — OA 637 of 2021 SUMODHUR BANERJEE -VERSUS- THE STATE OF WEST BENGAL & ORS. rial No. For the Applicants + Mr. Ekramul Bari, d Mrs. Sonali Mitra, ie of Advocates der For the State Respondents : Mr. Gautam Pathak Banerjee, Advocate ry Heard Mr, Ekramul Bari, leamed advocate for the appliggrand Mir, Gautaan Pathak Banerjee, learned advocate for the respondents. OS Lt reply be filed by 10% June, 2022. Rejoindesgiagy, by 27" June, 2022. Matter to appear under the heading “Reply/Rejoj Oe 2022. ‘The point of maintainability of we ler/Mbjection” on 29 June, application raised on behalf of the respondents is kept open. (SAYEED AHMED BABA) S : (SOUMITRA PAL) MEMBER (A) CHAIRMAN, Ke y ® Bikash Bhavan; Salt Lake, Rolkata ~ 700091. UBRATA CHANDRA POLLEY LEARNED REGISTRAR. fos - OA 637 OF 2024 oo CMODEURBANERIER: ~ SASH Wan Susie oF rege MILA. mons. aLNG,ond = “Rorthe appli : + Mr, Tanyja:Basak, soPorder. * Aiatate SCN. ‘nthe present application, the applicant bas prayed-for his appointment Tnispeoter of Druga per-advertisement dated 29™ February, 2016 in pu thie Solethh: judgetabhofithe Hot’ ble High, Court, Caleutta, passed S No. 120062018, QS “Considering WE HAUL OF the prayer, the applicant copy df‘the-applicsition:alongewith l. annexure State respondents by hand or by speed yoxt with proof of delivery, ey a-copy ofthis order intimating the next ate of appearance of dees Espondents. Fix 4" April, 2022 Be aafesatie of the State respondents and compliance of the aftresdiddigedtiGW by the applicant by filing service report supported by-a-verificat ASS (SUBRAT, OLE) WY ) S\ ORDER SHEET ® WEST BENGAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL mt Bikash Bhavan, Salt Lake, Kolkata — 700 091. “~ MR. SUBRATA CHANDRA POLLE, LEARNED REGISTRAR Case No. ~OA-637 of 2021 Sumodhur Banerjee - VERSUS ~ THE STATE OF WEST BENGAL & ORS. tial No. d tte of order 02 404.2022, CSMIHS For the Applicant’ : Mrs. S. Mitra, Advocate. For the State Respondent: Mr. G. P. Banerjee, aw Advocate. 7 wv Affidavit of service filed today in terms of the previous order anit same be kept on record. : Ww Mr. GP: Banerjee, leaned counsel appears for the St Qin . ‘Mrs, S. Mitra, learned counsel appearing for 1 licant has prayed for placing the matter before the Hon’bie gee corisideration of representation of the applicant being Annexure-E Mi Mr. Gl fas not been opposed by Banerjee, learned counsel. Considering the nature of see the matter be placed before the 1 Division Bench for consideration of lief as prayed for by the applicant. The Office is di ~ enlist the matter in the daily cause list on 22.04,2022 under the ney ‘Admission Hearing” > (SUBRATA CH. POLLE) vy REGISTRAR ORDER SHEET S2- = bode BENGAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL Bikash Bhavan, Salt Lake, Kolkata— 700 091. sent : HON’BLE JUSTICE SOUMITRA PAL, HON’BLE CHAIRMAN & HON’BLE SAYEED AHMED BABA, ADMINISTRATIVE MEMBER. Case No. — OA 637 of 2021. SUMODHUR BANERJEE -VERSUS-THE STATE OF WEST BENGAL & ORS. ‘erial No. and Date of order ee 79.6.2022 For the Applicant : Mrs. S. Mitra, Advocate. For the State respondents: Mr. GP. Banerjee, Advocate, « Heard leaimed advocates for the parties. wea Let the matter appear under the heaig Reply, Rejoinder and Objection” on 1* August, 2022. ee (SAYEED AHMED BABA) : (SOUMITRA PAL) MEMBER(A) = > CHAIRMAN. Skg. ORDER SHEET S23 WEST BENGAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL Bikash Bhavan, Salt Lake, Kolkata —700 091. Present-* ‘The Hon’ble Justice Soumitra Pal, Chairman, & ‘The Hon’ble Sayeed Ahmed Baba, Administrative Member. Case No. ~OA 637 of 2021. Sumodhur Banerjee, — Versus — The State of West Bengal and Others. Serial No. and For the Applicant Mrs. $. Mitra, Date of order ‘Advocate, > 06 For the State Respondents : Me. G.P. Banerjee, Y 01.08.2022. Advocate. As prayed for by Mr. G. P. Banerjee, leamed advocate RQ the State respondents, time to file reply is extended till 2" Septe 2022. Rejoinder, if any, by 16” September, 2022. Let the mat under the heading “Reply / Rejoinder and oveeee om ae September, 2022. ad (SAYEED AHMED BABA) MEMBER (A) SM ORDERSHEET 5 a WEST BENGAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL Bikash Bhavan, Salt Lake, Kolkata —700 091, SUBRATA CHANDRA POLLE, LEARNED REGISTRAR. Case No. — OA 637 of 2021. SUMODHUR BANERJEE ~- VS- THE STATE OF WEST BENGAL & ORS. Serial No. and Date of order For the Applicant : Mrs, S. Mitra, LY 6 Advocate. 219.2022 For the State respondents : Mr. GP. Banerjee, Advocate. Learned counsel appearing for the State respondents haf ly prayed for time to file reply against the original application which is ly opposed by learned counsel for the applicant. S Considering the nature of the case, tinfeyig, granted to file reply by 2° December, 2022 in default, the case record laced before the Hon’ble Bench for order. S & (SUBRATA CH. POLLE) - S REGISTRAR. “Y ORDER SHEET Ss. ioe e Ss WEST BENGAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL Bikash Bhavan, Salt Lake, Kolkata —700 091. ae SUBRATA CHANDRA POLLE LEARNED REGISTRAR Case No. — OA 637 OF 2021 SUMODHUR BANERJEE -VERSUS- THE STATE OF WEST BENGAL & ORS. al No. and > of order For the Applicant + Mrs, Sonali Mitra, 7 Advocate » 12.2022 For the Respondents : Mr, Gautam Pathak a Advocate ‘The matter is taken up pursuant to the order contained i a S exercise of the powers conferred under the Administrative ls Act, 1985 No. 638-WBAT / 2J-15/2016 (Pt.-II) dated 23" Novem! = ‘issued in and the Rules framed thereunder. Leamed counsel appearing for the spittin has eamestly prayed for time to file reply against Sa application which is 7 vehemently opposed by learned counsey r the applicant. Considering the nature of os % last chance is granted to file reply by 03.02.2023 and a copy of AY Sto be served upon the learned counsel for the applicant in advane (SUBRATA CH. POLLE) REGISTRAR, ORDER SHEET WEST BENGAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL Bikash Bhavan, Salt Lake, Kolkata — 700 091. Present - ‘The Hon’ble Sayeed Ahmed Baba, Officiating Chairperson and Administrative Member. Case No. ~OA 637 of 2021 modhur Banerjee. - Versus - The State of West Bengal & Others. Serial No. and For the Applicant : Mrs, S. Mitra, Date of order Advocate. 08 “For the State Respondents : Ms. A. P. Banerjee, 03.02.2023, Advocate. ‘The matter is taken up by the Single Bench pursuant to the. order contained in the Notification No. 638-WBAT/2J-15/2016 (Pt. ID, dated 23° November, 2022 issued in exercise of the powers coriferted under Section 5 (6) of the Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985; "4 On consent of the leamed counsels for the coritsting! parties, the case is taken up for consideration sitting singly 4, No report has been filed by the vstpans, despite last chance given on the previous dates. The nates to appointment of the applicant for the post of Inspector acl Driigs under Department of Health and Family Welfare. aired Mrs. S. Mitra, leamed advocate for the applicant submits that the matter may be heard one next date. Let the matt appear under the heading “Hearing” 12.06.2023. (SAYEED AHMED BABA) Officiating Chairperson and Member (A) ISAM uve sHEIEL WEST BENGAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL Po 4 Bikash Bhavan, Salt Lake, Kolkata ~ 700 091. ‘TH Hon ble Sayeed Ahmed Babs, Officiating Chairperson and Administrative Member, Case No. -OA 637 of 2021 Sumodhur Banerjee. - Versus - The State of West Bengal & Others. Serial No.and For the Applicant > Mrs. S. Mitra, Date of order “Advocate. 09 ror : . Baner izotbagy, For the State Respondents : Mr. G.P. Banerjee, Advocate, s » “ ‘The matter is taken up by the Single Bench pursuant to the, coxder contained in the Notification No, 638-WBAT/2I-15/2016 (Pt-1.. dated 23" November, 2022 issued in exercise of the powers coitetigd under Section 5 (6) of the Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985; ab nae On consent of the teamed counsels for the contesting parties, the case is token up for consideration sitting singly. Due to paucity of time, fet the mattér'by listed under the heading “Hearing” on 06.12.2023, =. SF . ‘Sh Sayeed Ahmed Baba ‘Otctting Chairperson & Momber (A) S.M./118. Certified to be: Tiwe Copy Reosryeijer ws icon fa MA TAR abn Al Dae Of Date on which the doennient Dato of application ja ready for delivery delivery WEST BENGAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL Bikush Bhavan, Salt Lake, Kolkats-700091 | wad 7 Appliention No, O74 pssyoorpta—63% ef goa Provent : 1, Mie $f Bada, Hoypble offered trpocson ond Member A) APPLICANT(8) RESPONDENT(S) $+ Bomenfer Stale. oF WBZ of4- ‘Court Fee Exempted Jos /23 ‘Section Officer? Supa HA. REPRESENTED BY West tengal Administrative Tribunal REPRESENTED BY : 5. tdhiq BP. Bomecpre (RUE Stee WEST BENGAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL Bikash Bhavan, Salt Late, Kotkata ~700 091. “The Won'ble Sayeed Ahmed Bab, Officiating Chatrperson and Adi istrative Member. Case No. -OA 637 of 2021 Sumodhur Banerjec. - Versus - The State of West Bengal & Others. Setiat No, and For the Applicant + Mrs. S. Mitra, Date of order Advocate. For the State Respondents : Mr. G. P. Banerjee, avecot a ae ‘Te ater ten yp by the Single Boneh parame te the

    You might also like