Saikat Mukherjee v. STATE OF WEST BENGAL AND ORS.

lodging FIR. It further submitted that Page Nos.41 to 44 of the instant writ petition (Annexure-‘P5’) being a copy of the notification dated 6th May, 2025, as issued by the Respondent No.2 authority, it would reveal that the aforementioned educational institution, as run by the Respondent No.5, is duty-bound to follow some mandatory guidelines. 3

#6. It is further submitted that prima facie materials have been placed before this court aforementioned examination the said institution, as run by the Respondent No.5, had failed to maintain the guidelines and, therefore, the very purpose of holding the aforementioned examination became frustrated.

#7. It is, thus, submitted that considering the gravity of the situation and also considering the fact that in the event, the alleged illegality and irregularity permitted to be continued without holding any enquiry, as prayed for by the writ petitioner vide representation dated 9th June, 2025, (Annexure-‘P1’), the entire educational system in the category of Technical and Vocational Education and Skill Development would become futile and would cause serious prejudice to the students who are pursuing their studies in technical and vocational education.

#8. It is, thus, submitted that appropriate relief/reliefs be granted in terms of the prayers made in the writ petition.

#9. Per contra, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the Respondent No.5, however, submits that in view of the alleged malpractices, illegality and irregularity in the said examination, a police case has already been started and in the event, the prayer made by the writ petitioner is allowed that would have a direct impact in the said investigation. It is, thus, submitted on 4 behalf of the Respondent No.5 authority that the instant writ petition may be dismissed.

#10. Mr. De, learned Additional Government Pleader, appearing on behalf of the Respondent-State, however, in his usual fairness submits before this Court that in the event the Respondent No.2 authority is directed to consider the representation of the writ petitioner in accordance with law that would not be unjust.

#11. We have meticulously gone through the entire materials as placed before us. We have also given due consideration over the submissions made by the learned counsels appearing on behalf of the contending parties.

#12. By filing the instant writ petition the writ petitioner has placed prima facie materials with regard to alleged malpractices as well as violation of mandatory rules of the notification dated 6th May, 2025. We have noticed that on the basis of a preliminary enquiry a P.S. case was started.

#13. Considering the entire scenario, as discussed hereinabove, we consider that justice would be subserved in the event, the Respondent No.2 authority is directed to consider the representation of the writ petitioner in accordance with law.

#14. In view of such, while disposing the instant writ petition we permit the writ petitioner to ventilate his grievance by way of a representation with the 5 Respondent No.2 authority within 30 working days from today along with server copy of this order.

#15. The Respondent No.2 authority on receipt on such representation shall give notice to the writ petitioner as well as to the Respondent No.5 and after giving due chance of hearing to the writ petitioner and the Respondent No.5 and/or authorised representatives and/or any other stakeholders, if there be any, shall pass a reasoned order and shall forthwith communicate the same to all the parties to the said hearing.

#16. The entire exercise, as indicated in the foregoing paragraphs, is to be completed within 90 working days from the date of communication of the server copy of this order.

#17. Time limit, as fixed by this court, is peremptory and mandatory.

#18. It is further directed that in the event, while disposing representation of the writ petitioner Respondent No.2 authority finds sufficient merit in such representation, he is directed to take all consequential steps thereafter.

#19. With the aforementioned observations and directions, WPA (P) No.29 of 2026 is disposed of.

#20. Before parting with, we, however, make it clear that while disposing the instant writ petition we have not gone into the merit of the allegation as levelled by the writ petitioner in the instant writ petition and thus, all 6 points are kept open for adjudication by Respondent No.2 authority.

#21. Urgent Photostat certified copy of this order, if applied for, be given to the parties, on priority basis, upon compliance of all necessary formalities. (SUJOY PAUL, CJ.) (PARTHA SARATHI SEN, J.)