1 30.09.2026 Item No.13 Court No. 30 skg WPA 11825 of 2026 Ranajit Ghosh Vs. The Indian Institute of Science Education And Research, Kolkata & Ors. Ms. Sanjukta Dutta, Adv. Mr. Amit Nandi, Adv. Ms. Ruchira Manna, Adv. … for the petitioner 1. The writ petition has been filed inter alia praying for regularization of the petitioner's employment in the post of Mess Manager or any other suitable post in accordance to his qualification. 2. Pursuant to an advertisement dated 19.8.2014 published by the respondent no. 1 (i.e. IISER), and upon making application thereof, the petitioner was called for interview on 27.8.2014 and was selected for the post of Mess Manager after considering his qualifications and suitability. In this regard, a meeting was also held on 18.8.2014 on the process of recruitment of a mess manager. 3. Admittedly the interview was a walking interview, though on the basis of an advertisement. The petitioner was selected in the post of Mess Manager by dint of student affairs by the composition of a committee for recruitment of Mess Manager and Accountant. 4. It appears that the students were running a mess in the institute, prima facie independent of the 2 institute. The petitioner’s case is that he is serving as the Mess Manager under various man power service providers, who were contractor engaged through tender process for outsourcing the operation of the mess. The petitioner now claims regularization even though admittedly there is no sanctioned post of a Mess Manager. 5. The petitioner has relied upon the minutes dated 06.04.2017 which indicates that his status at the relevant point of time was that of a daily wage employee. The petitioner also relies upon the judgments in (i) National Thermal Power Corporation Ltd. v. Karri Pothuraju & Ors. reported in (2003) 7 SCC 384 (paragraph 6 and 7) and (ii) Jaggo v. Union of India & Ors. (SLP(c) No.5580 of 2024 dt. 20.12.2024) (paragraph 25 and 26). 6. The respondent no.1 institute has contested the petitioner’s claim and its case is that the petitioner has been working in a student monitored mess, being appointed through a walk in interview, on the basis of an advertisement for recruitment on contractual basis initially for six months. 7. Admittedly, the petitioner worked under several contractors as a Mess Manager. 8. The respondent no.1 further states that all pay slips and certificates of employment have always 3 been issued by third party agency and not the petitioner. 9. It is further stated that the petitioner has already approached the forum under the provisions of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 or the Industrial Relations Code, 2020. He has invoked the jurisdiction of the Labour Enforcement Officer. The conciliation proceeding has already commenced and the R-1 has already submitted his representation to the same on 21.12.2025 and documents in support of his contention. 10. The respondent no.1 submits that once the party has raised an industrial dispute, the writ petition is not maintainable and prays for dismissal of the writ application. 11. On hearing the learned Counsel for the parties and on perusal of the materials on record it appears that the petitioner was admittedly engaged on temporary basis through a walk in interview, for a students mess, as a mess manager and has continued to work under various contractors, who have received their contracts through tender process. 12. There is no case made out by the petitioner that in spite of their being a sanctioned post and vacancy, in such a post, the petitioner is being deprived. 4 13. Though the petitioner has joined after a walk in interview through an advertisement, the entry has to be lawful and there has to be availability of sanction post for consideration for such regularization. But considering that the petitioner has already raised an industrial dispute which is pending, the writ application being not maintainable is dismissed. 14. The appropriate authority considering the industrial dispute raised, shall proceed in accordance with law, without being influenced by any of the observations made by this Court, in this order. 15. WPA 11825 of 2026 stands dismissed. (Shampa Dutt (Paul), J.)