- (1.) THE Judgment of the Court was as follows: THE writ petitioner participated in the recruitment process initiated by the District Primary School Council, South 24-Parganas, as a sponsored candidate. Upon publication of the result, the writ petitioner came to learn that he was excluded from the zone of consideration for being considered as a successful candidate. THE writ petitioner, thereafter, filed the instant writ petition and the matter has now been placed under the heading, "For Final Disposal" after exchange of affidavits.
(2.) FROM the affidavit-in-opposition filed by the Chairman, District Primary School Council, South 24-Parganas, it transpires that the said Council initiated the recruitment process in the year 2006 for recruitment of assistant primary teachers in accordance with the West Bengal Primary School Teachers' Recruitment Rules, 2001. and as a sequel thereto the names of the eligible candidates were sponsored, including that of the writ petitioner who was registered with the Employment Exchange, Kakdwip Circle, South 24-Parganas, in the year 1999. FROM the said affidavit it further transpires that on 22nd December, 2006, the Deputy Director of Employment, South 24-Parganas, wrote a letter to the Chairman of the Council requesting him to consider all the candidates whose particulars were sponsored against the vacant post of primary teachers by the five employment exchanges of South 24-Parganas, in different phases, based on the various cut-off dates for the different categories as stated against each of those five employment exchanges for taking their interview as per Rule. FROM the letter dated 22nd, December, 2006, it further appears that the district of South 24-Parganas, considering the strength of 'Live Register' of the various employment exchanges situated in the district, had earlier determined the cut-off dates of submission in respect of various categories, as follows: It has been specifically stated in the affidavit of the Chairman of the Council that since the registration of the writ petitioner was beyond the cut-off date, as determined by the Deputy Director of Employment, South 24-Parganas, in terms of his letter dated 22nd December, 2006, he was not considered for being selected as a successful candidate. In the affidavit-in-opposition affirmed by the added respondent No.6, being the Joint Director of Employment, South 24-Parganas, it has been stated, inter alia, that the sponsorship which took place was beyond the zone of consideration in terms of the 'Live Register' and the ratio stipulated for sponsorship and such sponsorship was erroneously done. In case of the writ petitioner, his name was enrolled as a 'General' candidate in Kakdwip Employment Exchange on 29th December, 1999, whereas in terms of the 'Live Register', candidates who had registered their names upto December 1993, were considered for being sponsored. It has been further stated that a mistake does not confer any judicially enforceable legal right to any person. It has also been stated that when the very basis of sponsorship of the writ petitioner was a mistake, which evident from records, there can be no question of consideration of the writ petitioner's candidature for approval. The learned advocate who represented the State, relying on the said affidavit, submitted that when the very sponsorship was erroneously done, the same strikes on the fundamental basis of the claim of the writ petitioner for being appointed. Thus, the writ petitioner is not entitled to any relief as prayed for. Having regard to the broad conspectus of the facts of the instant case, which has been culled out from the pleadings filed by the respective parties, it appears that the only issue which requires consideration is whether the writ petitioner can be treated as a validly sponsored candidate or not. particularly in the backdrop of the letter dated 22nd December, 2006, issued by the Deputy Director of Employment, South 24-Parganas.
(3.) IN order to answer this issue it is to be kept in mind that the admitted position in the instant case is that the writ petitioner's name was originally sponsored by the concerned employment exchange authority for the recruitment process initiated by the District Primary School Council, South 24-Parganas, pertaining to the year 2006. The writ petitioner was allowed by the concerned Council to fill-up the requisite bio-date form as a sponsored candidate. The writ petitioner participated in the recruitment process by appearing in the written examination as a sponsored candidate. In so far as sponsoring of names by the various employment exchanges are concerned, the candidates have no role to play. In the facts of the instant case also, the writ petitioner had no role to play and never misrepresented or practised fraud in order to have his name sponsored by the concerned employment exchange. The Council has not been able to justify in its affidavit as to how it allowed the writ petitioner to participate in the selection process as a sponsored candidate in spite of having knowledge of the letter dated 22nd December, 2006. issued by the Deputy Director of Employment, South 24-Parganas. The affidavit-in-opposition of the Council does not even attempt to throw any light on this aspect of the matter. The stand taken by the added respondent No.6, being the Joint Director of Employment, South 24-Parganas, to the effect that a mistake does not confer any judicially enforceable legal right to any person, is being taken for the first time in the present writ proceeding and was never taken at any stage during the recruitment process, either by the employment exchange authorities or by the concerned Council.;