Research › Search › Judgment

Calcutta High Court · body

2026 DAILYLAW 29850 (CAL)

RAJESH KUMAR SAHA v. STATE OF WEST BENGAL AND ORS.

WPA/26743/2024 · 2026-07-16

Bivas Pattanayak

body2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

16.07.2026 Sl. No.10(DL) Ct. No.14 srm IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA CONSTITUTIONAL WRIT JURISDICTION APPELLATE SIDE W.P.A. No. 26743 of 2024 Rajesh Kumar Saha Versus The State of West Bengal & Ors. Mr. Himadri Sikhar Chakraborty …for the Petitioner. Mr. Avishek Prasad, Ms, Shreyasi Manna …for the DPSC, Malda. Mr. Dibyendu Narayan Ray, GP Mr. Brijendra Pratap Singh, Mr. Nripendra Pratap Singh …for the State. Mr. Ratul Biswas, Mr. Kaushik Chowdhury …for the WBBPE. 1. Affidavit-of-service filed on behalf of the petitioner is taken on record. 2. On the prayer of the learned Advocate for the petitioner leave is granted to implead the District Primary School Council, Malda, as an added respondent No.9 in the cause title of the writ petition. 3. By the present writ petition, the petitioner seeks direction upon the respondent authorities to grant intra-district transfer to a school nearby his present place of residence upon consideration of his representation dated 2nd September, 2024 on medical ground. 4. The petitioner contends that he joined as an Assistant Teacher in Nanasahi Primary School under 2 Harishchandrapur Circle, District-Malda on 4th March, 2005. The petitioner’s service has been confirmed with effect from 4th March, 2007. Subsequently, the petitioner was appointed as a Head Teacher of Bhajanna Primary School, District-Malda on 15th October, 2007 and he joined on 16th October, 2007. Since then he is discharging his function as Head Teacher of the said school. The petitioner is suffering from slip disc since long and is under medical treatment. On 2nd September, 2024, the petitioner made a representation before the authority concerned for his transfer on medical ground. However, the said representation is still pending consideration. Hence, this writ petition. 5. Mr. Himadri Sikhar Chakraborty, learned Advocate appearing on behalf of the petitioner submits that the matter may be relegated to the appropriate authority for consideration of the representation of the petitioner for his transfer on medical ground, in accordance with law. 6. Mr. Kaushik Chowdhury, learned advocate appearing for the respondent Board submits that the State has already issued Memo being No. 277-SED- 13037/159/2024-ELEMN SEC dated 30th June, 2026 notifying that the Utsashree portal has become operative and as such the petitioner ought to file the application through the said portal. 7. To this, Mr. Chakraborty, learned advocate appearing for the petitioner submits that the same cannot be 3 accessed and the application has been regretted on the ground of maintenance being undertaken. 8. Mr. Brijendra Pratap Singh, learned advocate representing the State concedes to the fact that due to maintenance of the “Utsashree” portal, the same is not functional right now. 9. Mr. Avishek Prasad, learned Advocate for the District Primary School Council, Malda leaves the matter to the discretion of the Court. 10. In the above conspectus, added respondent No.9, District Primary School Council, Malda is directed to consider the representation of the petitioner dated 2nd September, 2024 and dispose of the same, upon giving notice to the petitioner, by passing a reasoned order in accordance with law, within a period of eight weeks from the date of communication of this order. 11. The reasoned order is to be communicated to the petitioner within one week from the date of passing of such order. 12. The respondent No.9 is granted liberty to seek for medical examination of the petitioner, prior to consideration of the representation of the petitioner. 13. Learned advocate for the petitioner is directed to communicate this order to the added respondent No.9, the District Primary School Council, Malda. 14. With the above direction, the writ petition being WPA 26743 of 2024 stands disposed of. 15. Since no affidavits have been called for, the allegation made in the writ petition is deemed to be not admitted. 4 16. Interim order, if any, stands vacated. 17. All connected applications, if any, stand disposed of. 18. There shall be no order as to costs. 19. All concerned parties shall act in terms of the copy of the order duly downloaded from the official website of this Court. 20. Urgent Photostat certified copy of the order, if applied for, be given to the parties on compliance of all necessary legal formalities. (Bivas Pattanayak, J.)