Satyabrata Sinha, J. - (1.) These three writ applications and the applications for addition of parties were taken up for hearing together and are being disposed of by this common judgment.
(2.) The petitioners in W P. S. T. No. 834 of 2000 and W. P. S. T. No 835 of 2000 were the applicants before the learned Tribunal. The petitioners in W. P. S. T. No. 941 of 2000 have filed this writ application before this Court on the ground that their interests would be adversely affected if some order is passed in the other connected writ applications as admittedly they are the successful candidates. Having regard to the order proposed to be passed by us it is not necessary to state the fact of the matter in a great details. Suffice it to point out that in the year 1993, the State of West Bengal had made an advertisement as regard NO vacant posts of Medical Technologist (Laboratory). In the advertisement no mode and manner of selection of candidates had been specified. However, according to the State itself, the following procedure had been adopted:- "5(b). In the year 1995, the Department of Health had been suffering in their work schedule of said laboratory work and investigation were being delayed causing great predicament and hardship to the patients due to non-availability of Medical Technicians, as 80 such posts were lying vacant. Despite various constraints, the Department wanted to fill in the said vacancies considering the distress of the patients, expeditiously. It may be noted that besides the Government Hospitals these technologists are also required in Primary Health Centres, all Medical Teaching Colleges and Government Blood Banks. (c) A huge number of eligible candidates about 4000 for only 80 vacancies, posed a problem for selection and the Government ultimately decided to make an arrangement for written examination in order to screen the candidates and those who got eligible (qualifying) marks, would be called for interview for selection in the posts of Medical Technologist. The written examination was held in accordance with law. In the said written examination all eligible candidates including the petitioners, in compliance with the order of Hon'bie Justice S. B. Sinha on 27.1.96 in C O. No. 12464(W) of 1995, were allowed to sit. After the examination, the answer papers of all the candidates were examined and marks were allotted. According to total marks obtained by each and every candidates, it was scrutinised whether the candidate obtained qualifying marks and those who obtained such qualifying marks, their names were published. Those candidates who belonged to exempted category their qualifying marks is 40 per cent out of total marks of 50, i. e., 20. Any person who obtained below the qualifying marks of 20 was not called for oral interview for selection of the post. (d) The Government had constituted a Selection Committee for the purpose of Selection of Medical Technologists (Laboratory) through oral examination and interview. The said Committee was consisting of Additional Director of Health Services, Assistant Director of Health Services. P. A. to Director of Health Services. Besides the aforesaid, the Committee was conferred with the Right to co-opt other members in the Committee as and when it would be necessary. The Additional Director of Health Services (Administration) as Chairman of the said Committee, in exercise of the said power to co-opt members, subsequently, do-opted the Joint Director of Health Services as Member. Two experts, viz., Professor and Head of the Department of Pathology. Calcutta Medical College and Professor and Head of the Department of Pathology, R. G. Kar Medical College were invited by the Committee in the oral examination. (e) The total marks in the oral interview was allotted 50, the distribution of which was as follows:- JUDGEMENT_44_LAWS(CAL)11_2000.html (f) Written examination was held for the purpose of screening and only to specify the number of eligible candidates who obtained qualifying marks in screening for the purpose of interview for selection for the post. The marks obtained in the written examination has got nothing to do with selection of candidates for the post, nor the same is a contributory factor. A number of candidates were selected as per decision of the Selection Committee on the basis of marks obtained in the oral examination/interview. The Selection Committee forwarded a rankwise merit list prepared on the basis of marks obtained by the candidates awarded by the Selection Committee in the interview. Accordingly, a panel for appointment of the candidates was prepared on the basis of the list of the Selection Committee." 8. With regard to Paragraphs 6.8 to 6 10 , Isay that a list of successful 240 candidates, forwarded by the Selection Committee, a panel was prepared on the basis of merit list of selected candidates and appointment were given from the said panel from two categories, viz, general category and reserve category. 1 further say that Sri Sudip Roy obtained 40 marks out of 50 in the interview and the Selection Committee, on the basis of merit, decided his rank as "11th".
(3.) Before the interview was held, the petitioners of W. P. C. T. No. 835 of 2000 filed an application before the learned Tribunal on 25th July, 1996 which was marked as O. A No. 459/96, inter alia, praying that the oral examination/interview due to be held on 1.8.96 be stayed and the records of the case be called for.;