Jayanta Kumar Biswas, J: -The petitioner is alleging that the authorities favoured the fifth respondent for appointment to the post of Accredited Social Health Activist.
The employment notice was published inviting applications for appointment to the post on contract basis. Both the petitioner and the fifth respondent participated in the selection process. The case of the petitioner has been stated in paras.4 and 5 to which my attention has been drawn by counsel for the petitioner.
Paras.4 and 5 are set out below.
"4.That the petitioner though appeared in the examination, conducted in two parts, 20 marks for written examination and 80 marks, out of 100 in total was unsuccessful as she scored 18 marks in the written examination and 24 in the oral examination totaling 42 out of 100." "5. That the private respondent who secured 43 out of 100 secured 5 in the written examination and 38 in the oral examination." Statements made in paras. 4 and 5 have been verified by the petitioner as true to her knowledge.
In terms of the directions issued by the Member Secretary, Itahar Block Health and Family Welfare Society, Uttar Dinajpur dated December 20th, 2007 the candidates were to take a written test and then a viva, and out of full marks 100, 20 were set apart for viva. It means that the candidates were to take the written test for which full marks were 80. Absolutely a contrary case has been stated by the petitioner in paras. 4 and 5 of the writ petition. According to her full marks for the written test were 20, and for viva 80. This is totally incorrect. She has made incorrect statements on oath. However, I am not inclined to take any action for that.
For these reasons, the writ petition is dismissed. There shall be no order for costs.
Urgent certified xerox copy of this order shall be supplied to the parties, if applied for, within three days from the date of receipt of the file by the section concerned.
