Research › Search › Judgment

Calcutta High Court · body

2026 DAILYLAW 30721 (CAL)

DIPANWITA MAITY v. STATE OF WEST BENGAL AND ORS.

WPA/6258/2026 · 2026-07-22

Bivas Pattanayak

body2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

22.07.2026 Sl. No.30 Ct. No.14 gd IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA CONSTITUTIONAL WRIT JURISDICTION APPELLATE SIDE WPA/6258/2026 DIPANWITA MAITY VS STATE OF WEST BENGAL AND ORS. Mr. Sujit Bhunia Mr. Pradip Paul …for the Petitioner. Mr. Brijendra Pratap Singh Mr. Asit Kumar De …for the State. 1. Affidavit of service filed by the petitioner is taken on record. 2. By the present writ petition the petitioner seeks direction upon the respondent authorities to grant 10 years benefit to the petitioner upon consideration of her representation dated 30th June, 2025 Annexure P- 8 to the writ petition. 3. The petitioner contends that initially she joined as an Assistant teacher in Chak Kandu Primary School, Amarshi Circle, Purba Medinipur on 8th March, 2010. Thereafter, the petitioner appeared in 6th State Level Selection Test (in short, ‘SLST’) and became successful and was recommended as an Assistant Teacher in Debkunda Sk. Abdur Rozzak Memorial Girls High Madrasah, Post Office-Debkunda, District- Murshidabad on 23rd Septembe, 2018. Pursuant to appointment letter issued to the petitioner on 12th November, 2018, she joined the aforesaid school upon resigning from the Primary School with effect from 24th November, 2018. Subsequently, the petitioner has been transferred to her present school namely, Akra High Madrasah (H.S.), Maheshtala, Distric- South 24-Parganas. The petitioner though has completed 10 years of service, however the benefits of such continuous service of 10 years have not been granted to the petitioner. On 29th October, 2025 the petitioner made a representation before the respondent no.2 seeking for redressal of her grievance. However, the same is still pending consideration. Hence this writ petition. 4. Mr. Sujit Bhunia, learned advocate for the petitioner submits that the matter be relegated to the appropriate authority for due consideration. 5. Mr. Brijendra Pratap Singh, learned advocate for the State concedes to such submission. 6. In view of the above, respondent no.2, Director of Madrasah Education is directed to consider the representation of the petitioner dated 29th October, 2025 (Annexure P-8 to the writ petition) and dispose of the same by passing a reasoned order in accordance with law upon notice to the petitioner within a period of eight weeks from the date of communication of this order. 2 7. The reasoned order shall be communicated to the petitioner within one week from the date of passing of such reasoned order. 8. Learned advocate for the petitioner is directed to communicate this order to the respondent no.2, Director of Madrasah Education for necessary action. 9. With the above direction, the writ petition being WPA 6258 of 2026 stands disposed of. 10. Since no affidavits have been called for, the allegation made in the writ petition is deemed to be not admitted. 11. Interim order, if any, stands vacated. 12. All connected applications, if any, stand disposed of. 13. There shall be no order as to costs. 14. All concerned parties shall act in terms of the copy of the order duly downloaded from the official website of this Court. 15. 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.) 3