4 0044..0033..22002255 Court No. 25 D.Hira WPA 13471 of 2019 Soma Chatterjee Vs. The State of West Bengal & Ors. Ms. Mousumi Bhowal. ... for the petitioner Mr. K.N. Nabi, Ms. Deblina Das Gupta. ... for the State 1. Affidavit-of-service filed in Court today is taken on record. 2. The petitioner after being recommended by the School Service Commission for appointment on compassionate ground vide recommendation letter dated April 2, 2013, since has been unable to join in the recommended school, for the reason that the school authority has raised doubts as regards the veracity of the age proof document of her, that is the transfer certificate of the petitioner issued to her by the respondent No. 7. 3. Allegedly in the transfer certificate issued by the respondent No. 7 dated March 18, 1998, the date of birth of the petitioner has been overwritten thereby posing serious question as to the genuinity and truthfulness of the said document itself. 4. Since thereafter, the petitioner has been loitering before the respondent school authority for issuance of a fresh transfer certificate to her in accordance with the records available to the school authority but to no avail. To seek redress the petitioner has 2 submitted a letter before the Headmaster of the said institution dated NIL. 5. Ms. Mousumi Bhowal, learned advocate appearing for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner’s letter as above has also received no consideration of the school authority as yet. 6. Notices have been duly served upon the school authority, pursuant to this Court’s order. However, no one is appearing for the respondent school authority. 7. Mr. K.N. Nabi, learned counsel appearing for the State has mentioned that the petitioner’s grievance is basically against the respondent school authority and not the State respondent. 8. He further submits that the petitioner when is able to produce the proper testimonials before the school authority, there would not be any hindrance by the same, to allow the petitioner to join in duty, in terms of the recommendation of the School Service Commission. 9. Heard submissions and perused the records. It transpires that the petitioner has been recommended for appointment on compassionate ground by the West Bengal Regional School Service Commission to the school namely, Harinavi Subhasini Balika Sikshalaya (Higher Secondary). 10. However, ultimately she could not join there since she could not furnish the testimonials in proper form to the satisfaction of the school authority. Allegedly, as regards the age proof transfer certificate of the 3 petitioner, due to overwriting therein as regards the date of birth of the petitioner, the veracity of the said certificate has been doubted and disputed by the school authority, resulting into them not allowing the petitioner to join in the said school. 11. The petitioner though having been recommended for appointment would not have any vested right for appointment, indefeasible in nature, until and unless, she substantiates her candidature by production of relevant testimonials in appropriate form. 12. Since the veracity of the document relating to her date of birth is doubted and challenged in the present case, it is the duty of the petitioner to produce a proper document before the school authority. 13. In such circumstances, the Court finds it proper to dispose of the present writ petition by directing the respondent no. 7, to consider the petitioner’s application dated NIL for grant of proper transfer certificate and dispose of the same application by dint of a reasoned order, if not such certificate is immediately granted to the petitioner. 14. Let it be mentioned that after production of a proper transfer certificate by the petitioner, regarding which the school authority shall be satisfied about the same, it shall immediately allow the petitioner to join in service with the said school, in terms of the recommendation letter of the West Bengal Regional School Service Commission dated April 2, 2013. 4 15. Let the respondent no. 7 complete the exercise as has been directed in this order, within a period of two weeks from the date of communication of copy of this order. 16. Since no affidavit is invited, the allegations contained in the petition are deemed to have been denied by the respondents including the private respondents. 17. With the above observations and directions, the writ petition being WPA 13471 of 2019 is disposed of, along with the pending applications, if any. 18. Urgent certified website copy of this order, if applied for, be supplied to the parties upon compliance with all requisite formalities. (Rai Chattopadhyay, J.)