13.02.2026 rpan/19 MAT 2070 of 2025 + IA No.: CAN 1 of 2025 + IA No.: CAN 2 of 2025 Sanghamitra Bhunia Mondal - Versus - The State of West Bengal & Others Mr. Arkadipta Sengupta, Ms. Amrita Maji, Ms. Ankita Ghosh … for the Appellant. Mr. Swapan Kr. Dutta, Mr. Biswaroop Biswas, Mr. Dipankar Ghosh … for the State. Mr. Ritwik Pattanayak … for the Respondent no.5/ School. IA No.: CAN 1 of 202 5 [Sec. 5] This is an application for condonation of delay. Having heard the learned advocates appearing for the respective parties and upon perusal of the averments made in the application explaining the delay, we are satisfied with the explanation. Accordingly, the delay is condoned, and the application for condonation of delay, being IA No. CAN 1 of 2025, is allowed and disposed of. MAT 2070 of 2025 + IA No.: CAN 2 of 2025 Mr. Sengupta, learned Advocate appearing for the appellant, submits that by the order impugned in the appeal, the Secretary of the concerned school was directed to forward the transfer application of the petitioner to the District Inspector of Schools (SE) concerned, who, in turn, was directed to make an endeavour to find a willing teacher from neighbouring schools to man the post of the petitioner, if the petitioner is transferred. He further submits that there is no provision in the applicable Transfer Rules that any transfer application of a teacher would be considered only upon finding a willing teacher from neighbouring schools. Mr. Pattanayak, learned Advocate appearing for the school authorities, informs that during the pendency of the appeal, the petitioner’s application for transfer was rejected by the concerned District Inspector of Schools by an order dated 24th September, 2025, on the grounds enumerated therein. Since, during the pendency of the appeal, the appellant’s application for transfer has been rejected, a fresh cause of action has arisen. In view thereof, without going into the merits of the issue raised by the appellant in this appeal, we dispose of the appeal and the connected application, granting liberty to the appellant to challenge the order dated 24th September, 2025, before the appropriate forum in accordance with law. There shall, however, be no order as to costs. Urgent photostat certified copy of this order, if applied for, be supplied to the parties, upon compliance of all requisite formalities. 2 (Partha Sarathi Chatterjee, J.) (Tapabrata Chakraborty, J.) 3