In a case where a petitioner filed a writ petition in the public interest to contest the appointment of the Chief Administrative Officer, a Division bench consisting of T.S. Sivagnanam, CJ., and Hiranmay Bhattacharyya, J., dismissed the petition on the grounds of prematurity and the petitioner’s failure to exhaust available remedies prior to filing the petition.
In the present case, the petitioner filed a Public Interest Litigation (PIL) challenging the appointment of a private respondent as the Chief Administrative Officer (CAO) of the West Bengal State Council of Technical and Vocational Education and Skill Development (WBSCTVESD). The petitioner’s main argument was that the notification issued by the Governor on 23-02-2021 lacked a notification number and did not mention any approval from the Government of West Bengal.
The Court determined that the grounds presented by the petitioner to challenge the 2021 notification were premature. The petitioner had not approached the appropriate authorities or obtained necessary information before filing the writ petition. The Court emphasized that it was not its role to gather information on behalf of the petitioner in order to support their challenge to the questioned proceedings.
The Court concluded that the writ petition could not be entertained at that stage due to its premature nature and dismissed it accordingly.
The writ petition challenging the appointment of the Chief Administrative Officer is solely based on the contention that the individual in question does not hold the rank of a Joint Secretary. The petitioner acknowledges in paragraph VI of the writ petition that the Chief Administrative Officer receives a salary equivalent to that of a Joint Secretary through the Career Advancement Scheme and not through promotion. The petitioner argues that this renders the candidate ineligible for the position of Chief Administrative Officer.
Name- Ritika Keshari, College – Shambhunath Institute of Law, Semester – 2nd semester as a intern at Legal Vidhiya
0 Comments