Appointment of the GDMO and Assistant Professor: JPD demands to HRB

To

The Secretary,

West Bengal Health Recruitment Board,

Benfish Tower (1^st & 2^nd Floor),

GN31,Sector-V,Salt Lake,Kolkata-700 091.

18 September 2025

Sub. Appointment of the GDMO and Assistant Professor in WBHS and WBMES respectively

Ref.:

1. R/GDMO/6/2025 Dated: 07.08.2025
2. 724/WBHRB/1R-01/2025 Date: 15.09.2025
3. 672/WBHRB/1R-01/2025 Date: 29.08.2025
4. R/WBMES/Assistant Professor/12/2024, Dated,06.03.2024
5. 667/WBHRB/1R-01/2025 Date: 29.08.2025
6. 668/WBHRB/1R-01/2025 Date: 29.08.2025
7. 604/WBHRB/1R-01/2025 Dated  07.08.2025
8. 603/WBHRB/1R-01/2025 Date: 07.08.2025

Sir,

Public employment in India is set down by the Constitution and the laws made there under. Our constitutional scheme envisages employment by the Government and its instrumentalities on the basis of a procedure established in that behalf. Equality of opportunity is the hallmark, and the Constitution has provided also for affirmative action to ensure that unequal’s are not treated equals. Thus, any public employment has to be in terms of the constitutional scheme. Constitutional requirement under Article 14 and 16 that public jobs must be filled through a fair, open and competitive selection process.

Sanctity of Public Employment Process: Government jobs are a public trust. They must be filled in accordance with the recruitment rules and through open competition to ensure fairness and equal opportunity. (Secretary, State of Karnataka and … vs. Uma Devi and Others, AIR 2006 SC 1806)

In view of the above-mentioned landmark judgement pronounced by the apex court and also with regards to the recent spells of scams in employment in the government and public sponsored sectors in the state of WB, there has been severe erosion of trust in the selection process adopted by the governmental bodies. Also, the faulty and erroneous selection procedures brings about large scale litigations, that many a times led to cancellation of the whole set of appointment procedures.

We raise the following demands to ensure a proper selection process in these crucial posts of the govt. service, as articulated by the apex court in Uma Devi case, 2006.

1. The vacancy positions as shown in the above referred notifications published   are apparently much less as per the situation in the reality. Accordingly, a proper manpower assessment & vacancy creation is needed. Department should assess the need for new posts based on workload, cadre strength, vacancies arise due to retirement, resignation, promotion, or creation of new posts. Each vacancy must sanctioned by the competent authority (Finance Ministry etc.).
2. Preparation and Promulgation of proper Recruitment Rules: Includes eligibility criteria, educational qualifications, age limits, reservations, pravisional period, and pay scale etc must be notified in the official gazette, with due approval of Public Service Commissions.
3. Notification of Vacancies and Terms & conditions of service: Vacancies must be widely advertised to ensure transparency & equal opportunity (Art. 16). Official Gazette + Newspapers + Govt. Websites etc., in ALL possible ways.
4. Selection criteria must be notified before the process begins. Changing rules of the game midway is invalid. Candidates should know the selection norms before applying. All the appointments must follow a fair, transparent, and rule-based process.
5. Short listing and eligibility screening with predefined, pre-notified open criteria must be done.
6. Selection Process: Written Examination, Personal Interview. Merit list prepared strictly based on marks + reservation rules.
7. Relative weightage of academic record, experience, written result, personal interview etc. must be declared beforehand. There must be predetermined Tie-breaking rules.
8. Reservation Compliance as per Constitution & laws. Rosters maintained for each cadre (100-point or 200-point roster system). Any deviation can be struck down by courts (as per Indra Sawhney, 1992).
9. There must be publication of the Full Merit List, to indicate the principle of Transparency, where candidates have a right to know how marks were awarded. If only selected names are shown without marks or rank, it raises suspicion of favoritism, manipulation, or corruption. Secrecy in results leads to arbitrariness; while full merit list publication strengthens fairness.
10. Appointment order issued by the Appointing Authority must include Post-designation, Pay-scale & allowances, Provisional period, Terms & conditions of service.
11. Appointments must follow constitutional mandate of fairness & equality, in order to ensure Judicial Safeguards. Courts can strike down backdoor entries, arbitrary regularizations, or non-transparent recruitments (as in Umadevi 2006, ML Kesari 2010).

With best regards,

Dr. Hiralal Konar

Dr. Punyabrata Gun

Joint Platform of Doctors, West Bengal

Ref.

1. Union of India v. Anand Kumar Pandey (1994) 5 SCC 663
2. Prabhat Kumar Sharma v. State of U.P. (1996) 10 SCC 62
3. CBSE v. Aditya Bandopadhyay (2011) 8 SCC 497
4. Mamata Mohanty (2011) 3 SCC 436
5. Madan Lal v. State of J&K (1995)
6. Hemani Malhotra vs. High Court Of Delhi, (2008) 7 SCC 11
7. K. Manjusree v. State of A.P., 2008
8. Ashok Kumar Yadav (1985), INSC 137
9. Subash Chander Marwaha (1974),AIR 2216
10. B. Ramakichenin (2008),1 SCC 362
11. Indra Sawhney, AIR 1993 SC 477
12. Tej Prakash Pathak Vs Rajasthan HC, 2024 INSC 847