Also Read - Supreme Court Clarifies Limitation for Probate Applications

The Court rejected the Commission’s explanation that identical marks were awarded after deliberations among the Board members, observing that Rule 5(e) does not contemplate awarding marks on the basis of the Board’s deliberation. It held that the Board must first attempt to achieve unanimity; only if that is impossible should the average of the individual marks be computed.

Justice Rao further observed that the record contained no indication of how the members had reached their conclusion or what basis underpinned the said decision.

Also Read - Punjab and Haryana High Court Sets Aside Proclaimed Person Order Against NRI Woman

Shortlisting Irregularities

The Court also found that the Commission had not followed the shortlisting procedure contemplated in the advertisement. Although around fifty candidates had applied, only thirty‑nine were called for interview. No screening test was administered, no objective shortlisting criteria were applied, and no merit list was prepared. The advertisement had stated that model answers would be published if a screening test were conducted, but no such exercise was undertaken.

Maintainability of the Writ Petition

The Commission objected that the petition should have been filed before the West Bengal State Administrative Tribunal. The Court rejected this objection, accepting the petitioners’ submission that the Tribunal was non‑functional due to the absence of members. Consequently, the Court held that the writ petition was maintainable.

Also Read - P&H High Court Commutes Death Sentence in Child Rape and Murder Case

Relief Sought and Denied

The petitioners additionally sought a direction to appoint one of them, asserting that she had secured seventy marks and stood first in the waiting list after the selected candidate. The Court declined this relief, reasoning that the entire recruitment process had been vitiated by the procedural lapses and could not be partially cured by merely substituting the selected candidate.

Operative Outcome

Accordingly, the Court quashed the recruitment process initiated under Advertisement No. 12 of 2022 and set aside the appointment of the selected candidate made on July 31, 2025. It directed the West Bengal Public Service Commission to commence a fresh recruitment process strictly in conformity with the Recruitment Rules and the West Bengal Public Service Commission Rules of Procedure, 1982. The Court further clarified that candidates who become overage owing to the delay shall be considered for age relaxation if they seek such benefit.

Also Read - Gujarat High Court Holds Electricity Company Liable for Electrocution Death