Harish Tandon, J. - (1.) IN almost all these bunch of the writ petitions, the petitioners prayed for an order commanding the respondents to allow them to sit in the written test/interview conducted by the concerned District Primary School Council for filling up the post of the Assistant Teacher in the Primary School within their respective districts. Almost in all the writ petitions, by way of an interim order, the concerned District Primary School Council was directed to allow the petitioners to sit for an interview/ written test and some of the petitioners of these bunch of writ petitions are found successful and have been figured in the panel of the successful Candidates, but their appointments are withheld because of the pendency of the instant writ petition.
(2.) THE point which hinges for consideration is whether the petitioners who are successful Candidates and have been empanelled but their appointments are withheld because of the pendency of the writ petitions, Can be directed to be appointed to the post of an Assistant Teacher, even if their Candidature is not sponsored by the employment exchange. In West Bengal Recruitment Rules of 2001, promulgated in exercise of the power conferred under 106 of the West Bengal Primary School Education Act, 1973, Rule 8 thereof provides that the concerned District Primary School Council shall invite the names of the eligible Candidates from the concerned Employment Exchanges for the purpose of screening out the successful eligible Candidates who are better suited to the post of an Assistant Teacher in a Primary Schools. Therefore, the zone of consideration was restricted amongst the sponsored Candidates and not otherwise. Admittedly, all the petitioners of these bunch of writ petitions are not sponsored Candidate but have approached the court against such action of the respondent authorities in restricting the zone of consideration amongst the sponsored Candidates in clear contravention to the law declared by the Apex Court In Case of Excise Superintendent Malkapatnam, Krishna District, A.P. Vs. K.B.N. Visweshwara Rao reported in : (1996) 6 SCC 216 wherein it has been held that apart from inviting the names of the Candidates from the Employment Exchange there should be a wide publication in the newspaper or announce on radio, television and employment news bulletins, so that all the Candidates who considered themselves to be eligible for such appointment may be provided an opportunity to offer their Candidature for such post.
(3.) AFTER the judgment rendered by the Supreme Court in case of K.B.N. Visweshwara Rao (supra) the point came up for consideration before the Division Bench of this court in case of Tanmoy Ramaya Lahiri Vs. State of West Bengal reported in, (2008) 3 WBLR (Cal) 108 whether Rule 8 of the aforesaid Recruitment Rules where zone of consideration is restricted amongst the sponsored Candidates is ultra vires to the Constitution or not. The Division Bench in the said report held: 13. We also with to view this problem from a different angle. Employment Exchange is set up by the Government to record and register unemployed youth and their respective qualifications so that they may be considered for employment maintaining seniority. The impugned rule obligates the Council to inform the concerned Employment Exchange so that appropriate number of eligible Candidates are sponsored by Employment Exchange and they are considered for employment. If we consider the Employment Exchange rules we would find that a complete procedure is prescribed to maintain transparency and to avoid chance of discrimination. An eligible Candidate once registered with the Employment Exchange Cannot be ignored in the matter of sponsoring by superseding him at the time of consideration. Here the sponsored Candidates are admittedly senior to the appellants. They were sponsored for the post. Chance of the appellants would come after the sponsored Candidates and at the appropriate time they would also be considered for the appropriate post as per their eligible qualifications. We do not find the impugned rule as irrational or illogical, rather it protects the interest of similarly circumstanced persons having them registered with the concerned Exchange. Thus we find reasonable justification in restricting consideration only through Employment Exchange and by maintaining seniority.;