Protik Prakash Banerjee, J. - (1.) Two sets of appeals are before this Court. The appellants in both cases are aggrieved by the same order. This is the order dated July 5, 2017 passed by the Learned Single Judge. In W.P. No.2351 (W) of 2017 [Sri Shibu Sarkar-v-State of West Bengal and Others]. By this order, the Learned Single Judge allowed the writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India and declared the appointment of the Appellant in MAT No.1192 of 2017 (respondent No. 21 in the writ petition) and any consequential action taken in aid of such appointment to be a nullity. MAT No.1191 of 2017 has been preferred by the college authorities, being the Principal of the College represented by Mr. Soumen Kumar Dutta and Mr. G.N. Imrohi. MAT No.1192 of 2017 has been preferred by the respondent No. 21 in the writ petition, being the appointee, whose appointment was declared to be a nullity. He is represented by Mr. L.K. Gupta, Learned Senior Advocate, ably assisted by Mr. Ataraup Banerjee and instructed by Mr. Tapodip Gupta, Learned Advocates. These appeals were consolidated and heard analogously, alongwith the interlocutory applications made therein, by consent of the parties expressed through their learned Advocates.
(2.) In the writ petition, the principal challenge was to the appointment of persons pursuant to the declaration of vacancies by the employer, the Belda College, on May 24, 2016. The relevant principal prayers are as follows: - a. A writ of and/or in the nature of Mandamus to issue commanding the respondent authorities concerned to take immediate and/or appropriate steps to cancel all the appointments already given to the candidates thereby cancelling and/or setting aside the advertisement being memo No. .B.C./1626/16 dated May 24, 2016 from the office of the Principal, Belda College, District - Paschim Medinipur declared about the vacancies at Belda College in the category of Group C & Group D. b. A writ of and/or in the nature of Mandamus to issue commanding the respondent authorities to take immediate and/or appropriate steps to issue a new notification thereby inviting applications from various candidates for Job Vacancy at Belda College. c. A writ of and/or in the nature of Mandamus to issue commanding the respondent authorities to consider the representation dated January 4, 2017 made by the petitioner before the respondent authorities and dispose of the same by passing a reasoned order after giving a chance of hearing to the petitioner within a stipulated period of time. d. A writ of and/or order and/or direction in the nature of Certiorari do issue calling upon the respondents and/or each of them, their servants, agents or assigns to certify and transmit to this Hon'ble Court all the records relating to the instant matter so that necessary orders may be passed and conscionable justice be done. e. Rule Nisi in terms of prayers (a) to (d) above. f. An Order may be passed thereby directing the respondent authorities to take immediate steps to cancel all the appointments already given to the candidates thereby declaring the advertisement being memo No. .B.C./1626/16 dated May 24, 2016 from the office of the Principal, Belda College, District - Paschim Medinipur as illegal. g. An Order may be passed thereby calling for a status report from the respondent authorities disclosing the names of candidates to whom appoint (sic!) already given by virtue of the advertisement being memo No. .B.C./1626/16 dated May 24, 2016 from the office of the Principal, Belda College, District - Paschim Medinipur and the reasons thereof. h. Ad-interim order in terms of prayer (f). i. Costs of and incidental to this application be paid by the respondents. j. Such further and/or other order or orders be passed and/or direction or directions be given as to this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper.
(3.) The selection process impugned resulted in the appointment of those persons who had been originally impleaded as respondents No.15 to 22 in the writ petition, but pursuant to leave being granted by the Learned Single Judge, on February 22, 2017, the respondents No.15 to 20 and 22 were struck off the array and the register and their names and styles expunged, presumably because only the respondent No. 21 in the writ petition had obtained appointment as a person with disability, since, as shall become clearer, it is on the point of whether the respondent No. 21 in the writ petition with an alleged disability of hearing impairment was entitled to be appointed to a post which the petitioner claims was to be reserved for a person with the disability of visual impairment, which was at res in the writ petition and is in these appeals.;