IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION Appellate Side 13.08.2026 S/L 09 Court No. 4 (Naba) F.M.A. 1433 of 2025 Shrabani Khan & Ors. Vs. The State of West Bengal & Ors. Ms. Pampa Dey (Dhabal), Ms. Sangita Banerjee, Ms. Debangana Dey ...for the Appellants 1. Heard the learned advocate for the appellants/writ petitioners. 2. The appellants/writ petitioners participated in a recruitment process for appointment of Librarians in a Sponsored Public Library in the rural area. As per the Rule prevalent in 1997, a person passed in Higher Secondary and having a pass certificate of Library Science from recognised institution, was eligible. 3. The recruitment was, however, conducted under a subsequent provision, wherein apart from Higher Secondary pass, there were three other requisite qualifications specified. The new recruitment process contemplated that candidates should possess a pass certificate in Library and Information Science; but also allowed participation of persons having Bachelor’s Degree 2 in Library Science. The third condition was basic knowledge of computer education. There was also a fourth condition/requirement i.e. that the candidate should be fluent in Bengali/Nepali, as the posting/s were to be done in the rural/hill areas. 4. The petitioner did not have a Bachelor’s Degree and therefore, has approached the Writ Court after making an application in the recruitment process. The appellants/writ petitioners contended that allowing the Bachelor’s Degree holders to participate, is detrimental to their candidature as, they are not having a Bachelor’s Degree as per the earlier 1997 Rules. The Writ Court did not entertain the writ petition and dismissed the writ petitioners’ claim by a Judgement dated 11.07.2025. The same is put to challenge in the present Intra-Court Appeal. 5. The learned advocate for the appellants submits that the advertisement inasmuch as it allowed Bachelor’s Degree holders was unsustainable. The appellants were otherwise qualified having a pass certificate in Library and Information Science from one of the named/recognised training centres. Inclusion of the Graduate Degree holders was unjustified. 6. We find no force in such submission. It is always open to an employer to raise the bar/specify 3 qualifications, which are higher than the earlier ones under a past Rule, with a view to raising of the standard of service, for larger public interest. No fault can be found in the fact that Graduates having Bachelor’s Degree in Library Science have been allowed to participate in the recruitment process. 7. We are further informed that the recruitment process is over. It is, however, submitted by the learned advocate for the appellants that the vacancies are still available. 8. Such submission also does not enure to the appellants’ benefit. Once the recruitment process is over, the existence of vacancies will not give rise to a claim in favour of the appellants/writ petitioners, as pending vacancies, if any, are subject to being filled up by a subsequent recruitment process. 9. No case is made out for interference with the Judgement dated 11.07.2025 passed by the Single Judge in WPA 13484 of 2024. 10. The appeal is dismissed. (Madhuresh Prasad, J.) (Partha Pratim Roy, J.)