Amitava Lala, J. - (1.) This appeal is arising out of judgment and order dated 12th January, 2000 passed by a Single Bench of this Court in W.P. No. 770(W) of 1999, under the writ petition, the petitioner, in effect, challenged the appointment of Respondent No. 18 in the post of peon (class IV staff) in the concerned school amongst others. While making such prayer or prayers, the writ petitioner made various grievances against the selection process of the Selection Committee making all the appropriate persons individual parties thereunder.
(2.) Although the writ petition was made challenging the selection process of the Selection Committee and the scope of entering into the arena is very limited as prescribed by the Supreme Court and the High Courts time and again, but the Single Bench of this Court had gone into the matter extensively upon calling affidavits from the respondents and passed an order virtually on the basis of affidavits evidence. The operative part of the order of the Learned Trial Judge is as follows : "In any event having regard to the facts and circumstances of this case I have no other option but to conclude that the selection of the respondent No. 18 for the post in question has not been done in proper manner. I, therefore, set aside the said selection and direct re-selection of the suitable candidate for the said post. The selection must remain confined to the persons who appeared at the said interview. The selectors, however, shall not be any of the members of the Selection Board which selected the respondent No. 18. The District Inspector of Schools shall constitute a Selection Board with five outsiders. They shall hold the interview of the candidates at the office of the District Inspector of Schools. The interview letters shall be issued to the candidates by the District Inspector of Schools. The Selection Board will then prepare a panel and submit the same to the District Inspector of Schools. The District Inspector of the Schools will then approve the panel and within seven days from the date of communication of such approval by the District Inspector of Schools the appointment letter must be issued to the selected candidate. There shall be no order as to costs".
(3.) The case of the appellant hereunder is that a Selection Committee was duly formed for the purpose of taking interview. The appellant's name was forwarded by following the prescribed rules. After taking the interview the members of the Selection Committee prepared score-sheets giving respective marks as per their choice. Ultimately, a final score-sheet was prepared. Under the said score-sheet the appellant obtained first position, the writ petitioner-respondent obtained the second position and one Sri Sadhan Chandra Pal obtained the third position. Such final score-sheet was also signed by the members of the Selection Committee. The Selection Committee produced the panel of the three selected candidates to the Managing Committee of the School who, in turn, referred the panel to the concerned District Inspector of Schools. The concerned District Inspector of Schools, in turn, approved the panel. The appointment letter was issued to the appellant whereupon he joined in the service. This writ petition is made challenging the selection process even after joining in service of the appellant in the said school.;