S/L 16 28.09.2026 Court No.24 SD IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA CONSTITUTIONAL WRIT JURISDICTION WPA 11141 of 2026 Lili Pal Das Vs. The State of West Bengal & Ors. Mr. Shuvro Prokash Lahiri Mr. Ankan Mondal Mr. Manmohon Singh Roop Roy … for the Petitioner. Mr. Kaustav Seal … for the State. Mr. Sunit Kumar Roy … for SSC. 1. Affidavit of service filed on behalf of the petitioner in Court today be kept with the records. 2. The petitioner applied for transfer in the year 2022 but the same was not approved by the school authority on the ground that she was a single subject teacher. The online application was returned back to the petitioner on October 2, 2022 by the school authority. 3. The petitioner challenged the rejection by filing a writ petition and order was passed by the Court on November 21, 2025 in WPA 26093 of 2025 directing the DI 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. 4. The DI acted in accordance with the said direction passed by the Court and sought for a no objection to be granted by the school. The school authority 2 intimated the petitioner that there is no application for transfer pending before the school. 5. The petitioner submits that it is only after the application for transfer was made by the petitioner online that the school did not approve the same. The same suggests that the school authority definitely has the online application otherwise the school could not have disallowed the prayer of the petitioner. 6. It appears from the documents annexed to the writ petition that the prayer of the petitioner seeking transfer was not accepted by the school on the ground that she was a single subject teacher. 7. The school authority in the impugned communication dated January 20, 2026 has repeated that the petitioner is serving as a single subject political science teacher in the higher secondary section of the school. Her engagement is essential for the continuance of academic activities in the school. 8. The school has also intimated that no application for transfer has been submitted by the petitioner either in physical form or through the Utsashree portal. Hence, no proposal for recommendation of transfer has been initiated at the institutional level. 9. The aforesaid observation of the school does not appear to be proper as the petitioner has annexed the copy of the Utsashree portal wherefrom it appears that the petitioner’s application stood returned by the 3 school authority on October 2, 2022 with the observation that she was a single subject teacher. 10. In view of the above, the instant writ petition stands disposed of with the observation that the petitioner shall file application seeking transfer afresh in the online portal disclosing the ground for the same. 11. If the online portal is non-functional, then she may file the application offline. The said application shall be considered by the Head of the Institution strictly in line with the law laid down by the Court in 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.) wherein 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. 12. 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 4 for filling up the resultant vacancy that might arise after the candidate’s transfer is allowed. 13. The head of the institution shall dispose of the application for transfer 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). 14. The entire exercise shall be completed by the head of the institution preferably within three months from the date of communication of this order. If the prayer of the petitioner is allowed, then the application shall be duly forwarded to the DI of schools for taking necessary consequential steps in the matter. 15. The impugned communication of the school dated January 20, 2026 stands set aside. 16. The writ petition stands disposed of. 17. Parties to act on the basis of the server copy of this order duly downloaded from the official website of this Court. 18. Certified server copy of this order, if applied for, be supplied to the parties upon compliance of all requisite formalities. (Amrita Sinha, J.)