06.08.2026 Item no.D/L 13 Court No. 24 Pradip, A.R.(Ct.) In the High Court at Calcutta Constitutional Writ Jurisdiction Appellate Side Case No. WPA 19948 of 2026 In the matter of: Shreyasi Dhang …. Petitioner VS. The State of West Bengal & Ors. ….Respondents For the Petitioner: Mr. Anindya Lahiri, Sr. Adv. Mr. Samrat Dey Paul Mr. Anish Chakraborty ….Advocates For the State: Mr. Biswajit Mukherjee Ms. Kanika Gupta ….Advocates For the WBJEEB: Mr. Amitava Chaudhuri Mr. N. Roy ….Advocates 1. Affidavit of service filed in Court today is taken on record. 2. The petitioner participated in WBJEEB – JENPAS (UG) 2026 under the OBC-‘A’ category conducted by the West Bengal Joint Entrance Examination Board. 3. A public notice was published by the Board on 16th June, 2026 for declaration of OBC class for availing the benefit of reservation. The time period within which the editing could be done was disclosed in the said notice. 4. By a further notice dated 19th June, 2026 the time period for declaration of OBC class for availing the benefit of reservation stood extended till 21st June, 2026 (11:59 PM). Page 2 5. The result of examination has been declared and the petitioner’s rank in the general category has been shown but not in the reserved category. 6. It has also been submitted that the public notice dated 16th June, 2026 is an ambiguous one. It does not clearly specify that all the candidates who had already disclosed their class for availing the benefit of reservation were required to submit declaration once again. 7. Submission of the petitioner is that no personal intimation for submitting declaration of OBC class was sent over email or registered mobile number of the petitioner. The petitioner missed the public notice. A chance ought to be given to the candidate to avail the benefit of reservation. 8. Learned advocate representing the Board submits, upon instruction that, notice was published in the website of the Board and all the candidates ought to have taken note and acted in accordance with such public notice. 9. It has further been submitted that information regarding declaration of class was intimated personally to all the candidates over their registered mobile number. 10. It has also been submitted that a total of more than forty two thousand candidates have participated in the examination. The counselling process is ongoing. It is practically impossible to reshuffle the entire merit list by giving benefit of reservation to one single candidate. 11. It has been submitted that change in the caste declaration had to be adopted by the Board in terms of the direction passed by the State. 12. Learned senior counsel representing the petitioner denies any information being sent by the Board in the registered mobile Page 3 number of the petitioner. Prayer has been made to consider the submission of the petitioner sympathetically so that she may not lose one academic year. 13. I have heard the submissions made on behalf of all the parties. 14. The submission of the petitioner that the notice was ambiguous and the petitioner could not follow the same cannot be accepted. The notice dated 16th June, 2026 was followed by a notice dated 19th June, 2026. Both the notices clearly specify that the online portal for all concerned candidates would remain active for a particular period for declaration of OBC class. 15. The petitioner intends to obtain benefit of OBC class. If the class is not declared pursuant to the notice published by the Board, then the candidate cannot be given the benefit of reservation. 16. The candidate ought to have been more vigilant and alert. The candidate may have been preparing for other competitive examinations, but the same does not mean that the candidate would miss the notices that have been published in the official portal of the Board which is carrying out a particular examination in which the petitioner was appearing. 17. Submission of the candidate that upon interpretation of the subject notice, it is not very clear that all candidates who had disclosed their castes earlier would be required to disclose the same all over again also cannot be accepted by the Court. 18. The subject notice is only meant for declaration of the OBC class and not for other classes or category of students. There was a requirement of updating the class in the OBC category for complying with the direction passed by the Court. The Board has acted in terms of the direction passed by the State. Page 4 19. The prayer of the petitioner for granting one opportunity to avail the benefit of reservation cannot be accepted more so because of the reason that there may be several other similarly placed candidates who may have missed the public notice and may have lost the opportunity to get the benefit or reservation. Granting any special privilege to a single candidate in a public competitive examination would absolutely be unfair and discriminatory. 20. In view of the above, no relief can be granted to the petitioner in the instant writ petition. The writ petition fails and is hereby dismissed. 21. Parties to act on the basis of the server copy of this order duly downloaded from the official website of this Court. 22. Certified server copy of this order, if applied for, be supplied to the parties upon compliance of all requisite formalities. (Amrita Sinha, J.)