JIAUL MOMIN SHAMIM UL BARI vs STATE OF WEST BENGAL AND ORS. — WPA /115/2026

Case under West Bengal School Service Commission Act ,1997 Section NA. Disposed: Contested--DISMISSED on 23rd March 2026.

CNR: WBCHCA0608512025

CASE DISPOSED

Next Hearing

08th January 2026

Filing Number

WPA /30070/2025

Filing Date

24-12-2025

Registration No

WPA /115/2026

Registration Date

03-01-2026

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

In service Other 117 ( 8 )

Judicial Branch

MANDAMUS SECTION

Decision Date

23rd March 2026

Nature of Disposal

Contested--DISMISSED

Acts & Sections

West Bengal School Service Commission Act ,1997 Section NA

Petitioner(s)

JIAUL MOMIN SHAMIM UL BARI

Respondent(s)

STATE OF WEST BENGAL AND ORS.

THE COMMISSIONER OF SCHOOL EDUCATION, WB

THE DISTRICT INSPECTOR OF SCHOOL (SE), MALDA

WEST BENGAL CENTRAL SCHOOL SERVICE COMMISSION, SERVICE THROUGH THE SECRETARY

THE CHAIRMAN, WBCSSC

THE SECRETARY, WBCSSC

Hearing History

Judge: HON'BLE JUSTICE REETOBROTO KUMAR MITRA

08-01-2026

NEW MOTION

23-03-2026

MOTION

20-03-2026

MOTION

19-03-2026

MOTION

18-03-2026

MOTION

Orders

23-03-2026
HON'BLE JUSTICE REETOBROTO KUMAR MITRA

The West Bengal High Court dismissed the writ petition filed by Jiaul Momin challenging the marks allotted by WBCSSC in an OMR-based examination. The court found that the petitioner's answer sheet had multiple shadings in question 15 (both options A and B marked), which prevented the computer from reading it correctly, and rejected the plea for manual evaluation since all candidates' sheets were evaluated uniformly by computer. The court upheld the Commission's decision and found no error in the evaluation process. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

casestatus.in Summary

The West Bengal High Court dismissed the writ petition filed by Jiaul Momin challenging the marks allotted by WBCSSC in an OMR-based examination. The court found that the petitioner's answer sheet had multiple shadings in question 15 (both options A and B marked), which prevented the computer from reading it correctly, and rejected the plea for manual evaluation since all candidates' sheets were evaluated uniformly by computer. The court upheld the Commission's decision and found no error in the evaluation process. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Browse Related Cases

Explore other courts

Search Another Case