Pratap Kr. Ray, J. - (1.) Heard the learned Advocate appearing for the parties. In this writ application, the petitioner, who is empanelled as the second candidate in the panel relating to the post of Physical Education, has challenged the panel as well as the appointment of the first empanelled candidate only on two grounds, namely, that the Panchayat nominee who was one of the Members of the Selection Committee, lodged a grievance to the District Inspector of Schools (SE), Nadia contending, inter alia, that the panel was prepared unfairly and in support of such unfairness, a factual point was raised that the academic marks in respect of Bachelor of Physical Education Degree was allotted flatly, that is, 20 marks to each of the candidate whereas the law prescribed that the marks should be given in the proportionate ratio of the percentage of the marks obtained in such Degree.
(2.) It is contended by the petitioner that the Panchayat Nominee was compelled to sign the final panel. It is further alleged by the petitioner that in the oral test and Class demonstration, out of 10 marks, the petitioner was allotted less marks that the private respondent who stood first in the panel. It is contended by the petitioner that the petitioner had placed many certificates relating to his performance in the Physical Education but those were not assessed.
(3.) This writ application has been opposed by the private respondent who stood first in the panel and is presently working in the post in question after the panel got approved by the District Inspector of Schools concerned.;