- (1.) The petitioner has challenged the constitutional validity of Rule 8 of the Recruitment Rules of 2001 as it offends Article 14 and 16 of the Constitution of India. The factual background of the instant writ petition is that the petitioner duly registered her name in the register of the Employment Exchange, Srirampur, Hooghly in the year 1990.
(2.) The District Primary School Council, Hooghly notified the brief vacancies for the post of Assistant Teacher in the Primary School with the Employment Exchanges within the said District. Rule 8 of the West Bengal Primary School Teachers Recruitment Rules 2001, framed in exercise of the power conferred under Sub-section 1 and Clause(K) of Sub-section 2 of Section 106 read with Clause (K) by Sub-section 1 of Section 100 of the West Bengal Primary Education Act, 1973, cast duty upon the Employment Exchange to send the names of the eligible candidates to the Council. In compliance of the above provision, the council notified the vacancy to the Employment Exchange in the year 2006 and the Employment Exchange sent the names of the eligible candidates but did not sponsor the name of the petitioner.
(3.) The petitioner filed the instant writ petition challenging the action of the council in restricting the zone of consideration amongst the sponsored candidate being contrary to the law declared by the Supreme Court in case of Excise Superintendent Malkapatnam, Krishna District, A. P. Vs. K. B. N. Visweshwara Rao, 1996 6 SCC 216. At the time of admitting the writ petition, as interim measure, the petitioner was permitted to participate in the written examination scheduled to be held on December 20, 2009. It was, however, observed by this court that such participation shall not create any equity in favour of the petitioner and shall abide by the result of the writ petition.;