Siddhartha Chattopadhyay, J. - (1.) This review application has been filed by the University of Kalyani and two others for revisiting the judgment and order dated 29.07.2015 passed by the then Division Bench in F.M.A. 1284 of 2013 with CAN 4236 of 2013.
(2.) The grievance of the petitioners as ventilated herein is such that the Division Bench ought to have considered that the essential qualification, pay scale and other requisite criteria were fully governed by the University Grants Commission (hereinafter referred to as the UGC) and, therefore, the direction as passed by the learned Single Judge, which has been affirmed by the Division Bench in F.M.A. 1284 of 2013, cannot be given effect to. According to them, the assistant teachers of the high school were governed by the existing government order issued by the School Education Department, Government of West Bengal.
(3.) That Division Bench did not like to interfere with the order of learned Single Judge because the learned Single Judge ultimately held, "the respondents are, and particularly the respondent no. 3 is directed to absorb the petitioner in any post commensurate with the status and qualification of the petitioner, i.e., to consider if the petitioner could be appointed as a lecturer of the respondent university, keeping in view that this is a case of absorption." There is a rider given by the learned Single Judge to consider "if the petitioner could be appointed lecturer of the respondent university ." This means that the Court has directed the present petitioner (University of Kalyani) to consider whether the petitioner could be appointed as a lecturer of the respondent university. There is no mandate given by the learned Single Judge for an absorption.;