State of West Bengal & Ors. v. Kalyan Kumar Jana and Ors. reported in (1999)4 SLR 182 - (1.) Having heard the learned Counsel for the parties, we are of the opinion lhat the impugned order has rightly been passed keeping in view several Division Bench decisions of this Court including one in . The learned Counsel for the petitioners however, relies on a decision of this Court in Steel Authority of India Ltd. v. Narayan Kumar Roy reported in (1998)2 Cal LJ 125, which has no application in the facts and circumstances of this case inasmuch as therein it is merely held that unsuccessful candidate cannot question a panel. In the instant case question which arose for consideration was as to whether any interview could be taken in view of the fact that the provisions therefore had come into force in the year 1996. The learned Counsel for the petitioner has again placed reliance upon a decision of the Apex Court in State of West Bengal and Anr. v. Bandan Bayen & Ors. reported in (1996)1 SCC 627 : [1996 WBLR (SC) 197]. The said decision against is not applicable in the facts and circumstances of this case inasmuch as therein it was held that in terms of the provisions of the West Bengal Board's Miscellaneous Rules, 1955 which was applicable as regards appointment of LDCs appearance of the typing test was a must and thus such typing test was taken legally. In Garware Nylons Lid. v. Collector of Customs and Central Excise, Pune, reported in (1998)8 SCC 282, it has clearly been held that the date on which a notification in the Gazette takes effect will be a date on which statutory rules will be deemed to have been amended. This aspect of the matter has also recently been considered by the Full Bench of this Court in Collector of Customs and others v. Jindal Strips Ltd. and others reported in (2000)1 Cal HN 332.
(2.) For the reasons aforementioned, there is no merit in this application, which is dismissed accordingly. Application dismissed.;