Biswanath Somadder, J. - (1.) By consent of the parties, the appeal is treated as on day's list and taken up for consideration along with the application for stay.
(2.) The instant appeal has been preferred against a judgment and order dated 22nd November, 2016, passed by the learned Single Judge in WP 2073 (W) of 2016 (Dr. Sk. Nafis Ali vs. The State of West Bengal & Ors.). The appellant before us was the private respondent no.15 in the writ proceeding.
(3.) One Dr. Sk. Nafis Ali, being the respondent no.1 herein, moved a writ Court challenging the selection of the private respondent no.15 for the post of Homoeopathic Medical Officer to be appointed on a part-time contractual basis at Nawabpur Gram Panchayat situated in the district of Hooghly. During the course of hearing of the writ petition, a report from the Pradhan of the concerned Gram Panchayat was called for. The Pradhan stated that the respondent no.15 had qualification. The learned Single Judge while considering the rest of the report in the form of an affidavit observed in the impugned judgment and order to the effect that the other part of the affidavit revealed a sordid state of affairs. The learned Single Judge has recorded the following in his impugned judgment and order:- " The Pradhan says that he had called a general meeting on January 4, 2016 to select the part-time Homoeopathic Doctor after discussing with the other members. At the meeting he and three other members opposed the appointment of the respondent no.15 but with the majority support respondent no.15 was selected and the resolution was passed. If this is the only thing that has been done for selecting a Doctor for the Homoeopathic dispensary I must say that the respondent did not follow the appropriate procedure or rules. When there are more candidates than one it is only expected that the authorities would initiate a regular selection procedure in order to assess the comparative merits of the respective candidates. The resolution of the Gram Panchayat as annexed to the affidavit shows that there were seven applicants and the resolution merely recorded that after scrutinizing the applications it was proposed to appoint the respondent no.15 as the Homoeopathic Doctor. Overruling the objection of the three members of the Samity by majority opinion the respondent no.15 was selected.";