Research › Search › Judgment

Calcutta High Court · body

2026 DAILYLAW 27851 (CAL)

PRIYANKA PRADHAN v. STATE OF WEST BENGAL AND ORS.

MAT/2381/2024 · 2026-07-13

Rai Chattopadhyay, Rajasekhar Mantha

body2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

13.07.2026 Court No.13 Item No.29 AP MAT 2381 of 2024 With CAN 1 of 2025 With CAN 2 of 2025 Priyanka Pradhan Vs. The State of West Bengal & Ors. Mr. Shuvro Prokash Lahiri Mr. Rajesh Naskar Mr. Ankan Mondal ... For the Appellant. Mr. Anindya Basu Ms. Debasmita Ganguly ... For the State. Mr. S.K. Roy ... For the SSC. Re.: CAN 2 of 2025 1. CAN 2 of 2025 has been filed seeking condonation of delay of 55 days in filing stay application and the appeal. 2. For the reasons stated in the application, the same is allowed. Delay in filing of the stay application along with appeal is condoned. 3. Accordingly, CAN 2 of 2025 is allowed. Re.: MAT 2381 of 2024 With CAN 1 of 2025 4. The appeal is directed against an order dated 30th September, 2024 passed by a Single Bench of this Court. By the said order, the Single Bench expressed certain views on the merits of the petitioner’s application for transfer. 2 5. Across the Bar, learned counsel for the respondents submits that the application of the petitioner is not in proper format and the Utsashree Portal is now available since 1st July, 2026. 6. There is, however, evidence produced by the learned counsel for the petitioner Mr. Lahiri stating that the portal is under repair and is not functional. This may be teething temporary problem. 7. Be that as it may, given the fact that the petitioner’s application is not in format prescribed by the State, the petitioner may make such application offline in terms of the Transfer Rules, 2015 and the format prescribed thereunder. The respondent authorities, including the school in question as per hierarchy, may take appropriate decisions in the matter as expeditiously as possible. 8. The observations made by the Single Bench regarding merit of the application of the petitioner are hereby set aside. The school, concerned District Inspector of Schools and the Commission may take appropriate decisions in accordance with law and as per their existing rules and policies with regard to the petitioner’s application. 9. The petitioner may make such application as indicated hereinabove within a period of seven days from date. The respondent authorities shall consider and dispose of the petitioner’s application within a period of two months thereafter. 3 10. If the portal is rectified in the meantime, the respondents may respond through the portal itself. Let written copies of the response also be communicated to the petitioner by email by the concerned respondents at all stages. 11. With the aforesaid observations, the impugned judgement dated 30th September, 2024 shall stand set aside. 12. Accordingly, MAT 2381 of 2024 is disposed of. Consequently, CAN 1 of 2025 is also disposed of. 13. There shall be no order as to costs. 14. All parties shall act on the server copy of this order duly downloaded from the official website of this Court. (Rajasekhar Mantha, J.) (Rai Chattopadhyay, J.)