calcutta high court

Calcutta High Court: The division bench comprising of Debangsu Basak and Md. Shabbar Rashidi, JJ. has allowed a bunch of application seeking the addition of parties in a matter related to selection of the candidates who have scored less marks than the petitioners in the Selection Test, 2016 for Assistant Teachers in secondary schools. The petitioners also sought permission to rely on a supplementary affidavit affirmed by petitioner in WPA 5538 of 2022 on 24-01-2024 and the Court decided to keep the supplementary affidavit with the record, postponing the decision on its admissibility. The matters are listed for further hearing on 05-02-2024.

The instant matter related to selection of the candidates who have scored less marks than the petitioners in the Selection Test, 2016 for Assistant Teachers in secondary schools. the Court vide order dated 19-01-2024 directed the CBI to produce the electronic devices seized from the ex-employee of NYSA and also to the original Certificate issued by the ex-employee of NYSA on applicants request to consider the letter dated 13-12-2023 written on behalf of the applicants to the CBI requesting for inspection of the respective OMR sheets and disclosure of the reason for inclusion of the names of applicants in the list of 907 school teachers of classes XI and XII published.

The applicant filed a prayer seeking the addition of parties in WPA 25380 of 2022. The application was allowed to the extent of adding parties as requested. The application was also treated as an affidavit-in-opposition to the main writ petition. Additionally, supplementary affidavits and notes of arguments filed on behalf of the petitioners in WPA 14670 of 2022 were allowed to be taken on record.

During the hearing, the petitioners also sought permission to rely on an affidavit affirmed by petitioner in WPA 5538 of 2022 on 24-01-2024. The affidavit revealed that the School Service Commission possessed the OMR sheet, and the petitioners urged the Court to direct the Commission to produce the same.

Some of the applicants argued against the peacemeal introduction of material. It was contended that the introduction of materials, such as supplementary affidavits, should not be allowed during the hearing and suggested following established legal procedures. It was emphasised that no importance should be attached to the supplementary affidavit, urging the Court to conclude the hearing without allowing further evidence. Reference was made to the previous order and argued that the Evidence Act should be considered before deciding on the admissibility of evidence. The applicants stressed the importance of Section 65B of the Evidence Act.

The Court noted the Deputy Solicitor General’s information that seized electronic devices were undergoing forensic examination and were expected to reach Kolkata by 29-01-2024 as the same was declined for forensic examination in Hyderabad and the Central Forensic Science Laboratory, due to the voluminous nature of the materials. The Court considered the submissions and noted that the hearing had commenced on 15-01-2024, with some counsel concluding their submissions while others were yet to address the Court. On 18-01-2024, an applicant requested inspection of the OMR sheet, leading to an order being passed in that regard. Subsequently, the petitioner sought to introduce a supplementary affidavit.

The Court decided to keep the supplementary affidavit of petitioner in WPA 5538 of 2022 on 24-01-2024 with the record, postponing the decision on its admissibility. The CBI was directed to produce the seized electronic devices by the specified date, but due to logistical reasons, the devices were expected to reach Kolkata on 29-01-2024.

In light of the circumstances, the Court deemed it appropriate to grant the parties one opportunity to rely upon documents/materials in the proceeding. Parties were directed to produce the originals or evidence in their possession by 05-02-2024. The matters are listed for further hearing on 05-02-2024.

[Subhamay Bhunia v. State of W.B., CAN/6/2024 in WPA 25380 of 2022, order dated 24-01-2024]

Must Watch

maintenance to second wife

bail in false pretext of marriage

right to procreate of convict

Criminology, Penology and Victimology book release

Join the discussion

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.