DEBAPRASAD PAUL AND ORS NIRMALAYA KUMAR DAS vs STATE OF WEST BENGAL AND ORS. — WPA/7992/2026
Case under West Bengal College Service Commission Act ,2012 Section NA. Disposed: Contested--DISMISSED on 10th April 2026.
CNR: WBCHCA0154892026
Next Hearing
07th April 2026
Filing Number
WPA/7934/2026
Filing Date
31-03-2026
Registration No
WPA/7992/2026
Registration Date
31-03-2026
Judge
HON'BLE JUSTICE REETOBROTO KUMAR MITRA
Coram
HON'BLE JUSTICE REETOBROTO KUMAR MITRA
Bench Type
Single Bench
Category
GROUP A (WRIT MATTERS) ( 1 )
Sub-Category
Selection Process 160 ( 1 )
Judicial Branch
MANDAMUS SECTION
Decision Date
10th April 2026
Nature of Disposal
Contested--DISMISSED
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
DEBAPRASAD PAUL AND ORS NIRMALAYA KUMAR DAS
Respondent(s)
STATE OF WEST BENGAL AND ORS.
Hearing History
Judge: HON'BLE JUSTICE REETOBROTO KUMAR MITRA
NEW MOTION
NEW MOTION 1
| Date | Purpose |
|---|---|
| 07-04-2026 | NEW MOTION |
| 10-04-2026 | NEW MOTION 1 |
Orders
Summary The Calcutta High Court dismissed the writ petition filed by Dr. Debiprasad Paul and others challenging the age limit imposed in the Assistant Professor recruitment advertisement issued by West Bengal authorities. The court held that since the UGC Act 1953 contains no parameters regarding age eligibility, the State has valid jurisdictional authority under the concurrent list to fix age limits for such positions, and the petitioners' argument that the State lacks power to set age limits while accepting its power to relax them was logically self-defeating. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Summary The Calcutta High Court dismissed the writ petition filed by Dr. Debiprasad Paul and others challenging the age limit imposed in the Assistant Professor recruitment advertisement issued by West Bengal authorities. The court held that since the UGC Act 1953 contains no parameters regarding age eligibility, the State has valid jurisdictional authority under the concurrent list to fix age limits for such positions, and the petitioners' argument that the State lacks power to set age limits while accepting its power to relax them was logically self-defeating. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Cases under same legislation
Explore other courts