19-08-2026 Item No.14 Subrata Bhattacharyya AR(C) IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA CONSTITUTIONAL WRIT JURISDICTION APPELLATE SIDE WPA No.10404 of 2026 Prodip Baul -versus The State of West Bengal & Ors. Mr. Ujjal Ray Mr. Binit Kumar … for the petitioner Ms. Koyeli Bhattacharya Mr. Kaustav Seal … for the State Mr. Sourav Mitra … for WBCSSC 1. Affidavit of service filed in Court today is taken on record. 2. The petitioner’s application seeking transfer could not be disposed of allegedly on the ground that the petitioner is a single subject teacher in the school. 3. The petitioner approached this Court on an earlier occasion and order was passed directing the District Inspector of Schools (SE) to continue to make aggressive efforts to locate the replacement of the petitioner in the school. Since 2022, it appears that the District Inspector of Schools failed to find out any replacement. 4. The issue as to whether due to non- availability of alternative teacher, an application for transfer can be kept pending or not has been conclusively decided by the Hon’ble Division Bench of this Court. 5. Reliance has been placed on the judgment delivered by an Hon’ble Division Bench of this Court on a similar issue on August 8, 2024 in MAT No.1218 of 2024 with CAN No.1 of 2024 (Gokul Chandra Mallick – vs- The State of West Bengal & Ors.). 6. The Court was of the opinion that the notification relied upon by the authority for not disposing of the application for transfer of the petitioner casts a duty on the District Inspector of Schools to make arrangement within a time-bound manner. The Court directed the District Inspector of Schools to consider the application for transfer. 7. By a further order dated July 31, 2025 in FMA No.995 of 2025 with CAN No.1 of 2025 (Rupak Dhua –vs- The State of West Bengal & Ors.), the Hon’ble Division Bench was pleased to observe that the claim for transfer cannot be kept in abeyance till a willing teacher is found. The Court was pleased to direct the District Inspector of Schools to take expeditious steps for filling up the resultant vacancy that might arise after the candidate’s transfer is allowed. 8. In the instant case, it appears that the prayer of the petitioner seeking transfer is pending consideration for a considerable period of time. The school authority and the District Inspector of Schools (Secondary Education) have failed to make any alternative arrangement. 2 9. Under such circumstances, the District Inspector of Schools (SE), South 24-Parganas, the fifth respondent herein, is directed to consider the petitioner’s application for transfer and dispose of the same in accordance with law irrespective of the fact whether any alternative arrangement could be made or not. The resultant vacancy on the transfer of the petitioner shall be filled up in the manner as directed by the Hon’ble Division Bench in the matter of Rupak Dhua (supra). 10. The entire exercise shall be completed by the District Inspector of Schools preferably within three months from the date of communication of this order. 11. The writ petition stands disposed of. 12. All parties shall act on the basis of a server copy of this order duly downloaded from the official website of this Court. 13. Certified server copy of this order, if applied for, be supplied to the parties on compliance of all requisite formalities. [Amrita Sinha, J] 3