Vidya Nand, J. - (1.) This is an appeal Sled by the appellants who were not parties in writ application after obtaining 'leave from this Court. The appeal was also filed with 234 days' delay which was also condoned.
(2.) The fact of the case in short is that in the month of January 1995 names of twenty candidates including the appellants herein were sponsored by the local Employment Exchange for the purpose of appointment in the post of Clerk in Backura Junior High School and thereafter the said candidates appeared In the Interview on November 29, 1995 at It a m pursuant to the letters issued by the Secretary, Managing Committee of the said school. It is the case of the appellants that at the time when they appeared before the Selection Board for Interview, they found one candidate whose name was not sponsored by the Employment Exchange appeared there for interview and for that the appellants refused to appear in the interview and a letter to that effect was given by them to the Secretary of the Managing Committee of the school. In the letter addressed to the Secretary it was stated that they were the candidates sponsored by the Employment Exchange and as because the Managing Committee had allowed one Candidate (the respondent No 1 in this appeal) whose came was not sponsored by the Employment Exchange, they refused to appear in the interview and left the school Consequent upon such refusal by the appellant whose names were sponsored by the Employment Exchange did not appear in the interview and only the respondent No. 1 Brojo Gopal Biswas appeared and was selected in the interview and his name was forward to the District Inspector of School., concerned for approval. Ultimately the said panel was approved and the said Brojo Gopal Biswas was given appointment in the post of Clerk. Thereafter it is stated that in December 1995 the appellants came to know that Brojo Gopal filed a writ application before this Court whereupon in order was passed on May 7, 1995 and on the bases of the said order he was allowed to appear in the interview Against the said order of the learned trial judge the appellants filed an application for leave to appeal along with an application for condonation of delay.
(3.) Mr. Bose, learned Counsel appearing for the appellants stated that the writ petitioner has obtained the order by commission of fraud in view of the fact that the writ petitioner was never appointed as a clerk of the said school, but the learned trial Judge passed an order that since the writ petitioner was working in she said school as a clerk since 1993 his case should also be considered along with the other candidates sponsored by the Employment Excharge by the Selection Committee for the said post of clerk. This according to Mr. Bose, was a fraud is view of the fact that subsequently a Division Bench of this Court presided over by S.B. Sinha, and S.N Chakraborty, J. (is His Lordship then was) or March 7, 1996 passed an order directing the District Inspector of Schools (S. E ), 24 Parganas (North) to submit a report with regard to the matter after making independent verification and upon taking into consideration the entire materials on record placed before him by the school authorities as well as the appellants as to whether the writ petitioner was working as a clerk in the school since 1993 or not.;