WP(C)/1699/2017 of DR. PRATAP SANYAL Vs TRIPURA MEDICAL COLLEGE AND DR. BRAM TEACHING HOSPITAL AND ORS on 21 December 2017

|**Noting by Officer or**<br>**Advocate**|**Serial**<br>**No.**|**Date**||**Office notes, reports, orders or proceedings**<br>**With signature**| |---|---|---|---|---| |||||**WP(C) 1699 of 2017**<br>**B E F O R E**<br>**THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE S.TALAPATRA**<br>**21.12.2017**<br> <br>Heard Mr. PK Biswas, learned senior counsel assisted by Mr.<br>P. Majumder, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner as well<br>as Mr. P. Datta, learned counsel who has appeared for the<br>respondents having received notice in advance.<br>The prayer of the petitioner by means of this writ petition<br>runs interalia as under:<br>**“ask the respondents to appoint/recruit the petitioner as Associate**<br>**Professor in General Surgery in the Tripura Medical College & Dr.**<br>**BRAM Teaching hospital, Agartala” **<br>No other relief has been prayed.<br>The petitioner had also earlier approached this court for<br>direction upon the respondents for his recruitment as Assistant<br>Professor in General Surgery Department by filing a writ petition<br>being WP(C) 1056 of 2016 which was disposed of by the judgment<br>and order dated 16.09.2016 where this court has observed as<br>under:<br>**“This Court while sitting in writ jurisdiction cannot decide the**<br>**requirement of the faculty member of a medical college. The petitioner**<br>**is working till today as a faculty i.e. Assistant Professor in the General**<br>**Surgery Department. The medical college is to impart education to the**<br>**coming generation of doctors and obviously an efficient teacher should**<br>**be considered for serving the purpose of education of such an**<br>**institution. The decision has to be taken by the institute as to whether**<br>**the service of the petitioner is required or not. If similarly situated**<br>**other teaching staff has been re-employed, the petitioner can expect**<br>**that he should not be discriminated. Since it is within the domain of**<br>**the institute regarding re-employment and/or giving extension of the**<br>**employment or re-employment, I leave it to the wisdom of the**<br>**institute and I hope and trust that the institute shall take a impartial**<br>**and reasonable decision considering the requirement of service of the**<br>**petitioner for the benefit of the students of the institute and that the**<br>**petitioner will not be discriminated.”**<br>This<br>time<br>the<br>petitioner<br>has<br>approached<br>regarding<br>appointment as the Associate professor for which, according to Mr.<br>Biswas, learned senior counsel, the petitioner has appeared in the<br>interview board, but the outcome of the interview has been not<br>made known to the petitioner rather the respondents have started<br>search for the persons to engage as the Associate Professor in the<br>said Institution.<br>At this juncture, Mr. Datta, learned counsel appearing for the<br>respondents has categorically stated that the process in which the<br>petitioner had participated has not been finalized as yet and as<br>such the petitioner does not have any cause as there is no instance<br>of rejection or appointing someone else in the post adverted for<br>appointment i.e. Associate Professor in the General Surgery<br>Department.|

|**Noting by Officer or**<br>**Advocate**|**Serial**<br>**No.**|**Date**|**Office notes, reports, orders or proceedings**<br>**With signature**| |---|---|---|---| ||_Saikat_||In such situation, the petitioner does not have any cause to<br>approach this court. However, the respondents are directed to<br>finalize the process within a reasonable period but by any rate not<br>beyond 31.01.2018. If the petitioner is aggrieved by any decision of<br>the respondents, the petitioner will be at liberty to approach this<br>court afresh.<br>In terms of the above, this writ petition is disposed of. No<br>order as to costs.<br>Copy of this order be supplied to Mr. P. Datta, learned<br>counsel appearing for the respondents.<br>**JUDGE**|