SOUMITRA PAL,J. - (1.) This appeal has been preferred from a common judgment delivered on 3rd July, 2012 by the learned Single Judge in the writ petition being W.P. 4406 (W) of 2010 (Sisters of St. Joseph of Cluny v. The State of West Bengal & Ors.) and on the writ petition being W.P. No. 5002 (W) of 2010 (Governing Body of Cluny Women's College v. The State of West Bengal & ors.). By the said judgment the former writ petition - W.P. 4406 (W) of 2010 was dismissed and the latter was disposed of in view of reasonings given in the former writ petition. In the later writ petition, - W.P. No. 5002 (W) of 2010, the petitioners in W.P. 4406 (W) of 2010 was the respondents No. 4. Being aggrieved, the writ petitioner in W.P. 4406 (W) of 2010 has preferred this appeal.
(2.) The writ petition, being W.P. 4406 (W) of 2010, was moved with the following prayers:- "A. A declaration that statute 1 of the statutes relating to governing bodies of colleges of University of North Bengal is ultra vires and unconstitutional; B. A writ of mandamus or any other writ, direction or order restraining the 3rd respondent from exercising the functions of the governing body of Cluny Women's College and to restrain them from interfering with the functions of the governing body of Cluny Women's College constituted by the petitioner society;" ( page 60 of the paper book).
(3.) It appears from the judgment impugned that prayer 'A' in W.P. 4406 (W) of 2010 was not pressed on behalf of the writ petitioner. The learned Single Judge after hearing the parties had held, inter alia, the following:- "I have considered the rival submissions advanced by the learned advocates appearing for the parties. It can be pointed out that section 11 of the Act of 2004 describes the functions of the Commission and section 12 describes the powers of the Commission. Section 12, 12A leave no manner of doubt that in the matter of granting minority status the National Commission has been given an appellate power. I am in any event bound by the Division Bench Judgment of this court. When the commission is the appellate authority and the competent authority is the original authority under the Act and the admitted fact is that the task of the original authority was performed by the appellate authority, there is hardly any scope for any debate that the order was without jurisdiction. The fact that the state or the University unsuccessfully challenged the order before the commission is altogether besides the issue. Any order, which is passed without jurisdiction is illegal and a nullity and such illegality can be set up at any stage when the illegal order is sought to be relied upon. For the aforesaid reason, it is not possible for me to grant any relief to the writ petition. This writ petition is, therefore, dismissed. There shall, however, be no order as to costs. In the writ petition No. 5002(W) of 2010 the prayer is to cancel and/or rescind the declaration dated 25th October, 2007. I already have held that the aforesaid order passed by the National Commission is illegal for reasons already discussed. Therefore, nothing survives of this writ petition namely W.P.5002(W) of 2010. That writ petition is accordingly disposed of." (pages 445 to 447 of the paper book). ;