SUVENDU HALDER AND ORS. ARKA NANDI vs STATE OF WEST BENGAL AND ORS. — WPA/3759/2023

Case under West Bengal Board of Primary Education Act ,1973 Section NA. Disposed: Contested--ALLOWED on 19th May 2026.

Case disposed Next hearing 28-Feb-2023

CNR: WBCHCA0075782023

Filing Number

WPA/3780/2023

Filing Date

14-Feb-2023

Registration No

WPA/3759/2023

Registration Date

14-Feb-2023

Judge

Hon'ble Justice Gaurang Kanth

Coram

Hon'ble Justice Gaurang Kanth

Bench Type

Single Bench

Category

GROUP A (WRIT MATTERS) ( 1 )

Sub-Category

In Service Others 87 ( 9 )

Judicial Branch

MANDAMUS SECTION

Decision Date

19-May-2026

Nature of Disposal

Contested--ALLOWED

Last updated 29-May-2026

Acts & Sections

West Bengal Board of Primary Education Act ,1973 Section NA

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.SUVENDU HALDER AND ORS. ARKA NANDI

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.STATE OF WEST BENGAL AND ORS.

Case History

  1. Case disposedDisposed

  2. 19-May-2026

    Hon'ble Justice Gaurang KanthView PDF

  3. 19-May-2026

    Hon'ble Justice Gaurang KanthView PDF

    Summary of WPA 3759/2023 - Shuvendu Haldar v. State of West Bengal Court Decision: The High Court of Calcutta allowed the writ petition and directed reinstatement of all three petitioners as Assistant Teachers in the untrained category with full service benefits within eight weeks. The court found that the respondent authorities erroneously classified the petitioners as trained teachers despite their applications clearly stating untrained category status, and held that respondents cannot benefit from their own administrative error. Key Reasoning: All three petitioners secured marks exceeding their respective category cut-offs even after excluding Special B.Ed. marks. The court applied the principle that authorities cannot defeat legitimate claims by relying on situations created by their own default, and directed creation of supernumerary posts if substantive vacancies are unavailable. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  4. 07-May-2026

    Hon'ble Justice Gaurang KanthView PDF

  5. 07-May-2026

    Assigned Matters

    Hon'ble Justice Gaurang Kanth

  6. 10-Apr-2026

    Hon'ble Justice Gaurang KanthView PDF

  7. 24-Mar-2025

    Hon'ble Justice Gaurang KanthView PDF

  8. 05-Mar-2025

    Hon'ble Justice Biswajit BasuView PDF

  9. 05-Nov-2024

    To Be Mentioned

    Hon'ble Justice Amrita Sinha

  10. 11-Sep-2024

    Hon'ble Justice Amrita SinhaView PDF

  11. 26-Jul-2024

    Hon'ble Justice Amrita SinhaView PDF

  12. 26-Jul-2024

    Hon'ble Justice Amrita SinhaView PDF

  13. 26-Jul-2024

    To Be Mentioned

    Hon'ble Justice Amrita Sinha

  14. 25-Jul-2024

    Adjourned Motion

    Hon'ble Justice Amrita Sinha

  15. 24-Jul-2024

    Upgraded Motion

    Hon'ble Justice Amrita Sinha

  16. 15-Jul-2024

    Hon'ble Justice Amrita SinhaView PDF

  17. 15-Jul-2024

    Upgraded Motion

    Hon'ble Justice Rajasekhar Mantha

  18. 12-Jul-2024

    Upgraded Motion

    Hon'ble Justice Rajasekhar Mantha

  19. 14-Jun-2023

    Hon'ble Justice Abhijit GangopadhyayView PDF

  20. 28-Mar-2023

    New Motion (Part-C)

    Hon'ble Justice Abhijit Gangopadhyay

  21. 10-Mar-2023

    New Motion (Part-C)

    Hon'ble Justice Abhijit Gangopadhyay

  22. 09-Mar-2023

    New Motion (Part-C)

    Hon'ble Justice Abhijit Gangopadhyay

  23. 03-Mar-2023

    New Motion (Part-C)

    Hon'ble Justice Abhijit Gangopadhyay

  24. 02-Mar-2023

    New Motion (Part-C)

    Hon'ble Justice Abhijit Gangopadhyay

  25. 01-Mar-2023

    New Motion (Part-C)

    Hon'ble Justice Abhijit Gangopadhyay

  26. 28-Feb-2023

    First hearing

    Initial hearing scheduled

  27. 14-Feb-2023

    Case filed

    Registration No. WPA/3759/2023

casestatus.in Summary

Summary of WPA 3759/2023 - Shuvendu Haldar v. State of West Bengal Court Decision: The High Court of Calcutta allowed the writ petition and directed reinstatement of all three petitioners as Assistant Teachers in the untrained category with full service benefits within eight weeks. The court found that the respondent authorities erroneously classified the petitioners as trained teachers despite their applications clearly stating untrained category status, and held that respondents cannot benefit from their own administrative error. Key Reasoning: All three petitioners secured marks exceeding their respective category cut-offs even after excluding Special B.Ed. marks. The court applied the principle that authorities cannot defeat legitimate claims by relying on situations created by their own default, and directed creation of supernumerary posts if substantive vacancies are unavailable. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

District Courts Supreme Court
Search Another Case