Dipankar Datta, J. - (1.) A short order dated August 29, 2013 passed by a learned Judge of this Court dismissing W.P. 10142(W) of 2011 is questioned in this writ appeal. The same reads as follows: "The issue sought to be raised in the instant writ petition was raised in an earlier writ petition, i.e. W.P. 10029(W) of 2010, which was dismissed on 23rd August, 2010. As such, this writ petition also cannot be entertained and is liable to be dismissed and is accordingly dismissed."
(2.) Bare perusal of the aforesaid order would not reveal as to whether the earlier writ petition, W.P. 10029(W) of 2010, was dismissed on merit or not. Accordingly, we called upon Mr. Sanyal, learned advocate for the petitioner to place the order of dismissal of W.P. 10029(W) of 2010. He invited our attention to page 247 of the paper book. The date of the order not being printed on such page, we called for the records of W.P. 10029 (W) of 2010 and found the same to have been dismissed for default on August 4, 2010 on second call, owing to non-appearance of anyone to press the same. The reference to order dated August 23, 2010 in the impugned order could be a misprint or because of inadvertence.
(3.) We find from the records of W.P. 10029 (W) of 2010 that the same was at the instance of 22 petitioners, who were aspirants for the posts of assistant teachers in primary schools within the jurisdiction of the District Primary School Council (South 24-Parganas) (hereafter the DPSC) but were unsuccessful in obtaining offers of appointment. Accordingly, they had prayed for direction on the DPSC and the other respondents in the writ petition to give them appointment, and also to restrain them (the respondents) from giving appointment to any candidate who was not otherwise eligible.;