The Calcutta High Court has ruled that reopening an online recruitment portal for corrections to application details cannot be treated as an opportunity for candidates to submit fresh applications after the prescribed deadline. Dismissing a petition by a TET-qualified OBC candidate, Justice Rishad Medora held that the West Bengal Board of Primary Education's October 14, 2026 notification only allowed applicants to rectify particulars and did not extend the application window for new candidates.
The case, Sambhu Charan Bera v. The State of West Bengal & Ors. (WPA 31497 of 2026), concerned recruitment to 13,421 Assistant Teacher vacancies in government-aided primary, government-sponsored primary and junior basic schools across West Bengal.
Candidate sought access to recruitment portal
Bera approached the High Court seeking permission to apply under recruitment notifications issued by the Board on September 25 and November 19, 2025. He requested that the online application portal be made accessible to him or, alternatively, that the Board be directed to accept his application in physical form.
His counsel submitted that Bera was an Indian citizen belonging to the Other Backward Classes (OBC) category and had qualified the Teacher Eligibility Test (TET) conducted on December 11, 2022. The results of the examination were declared on November 10, 2023.
The recruitment drive, conducted under the West Bengal Primary School Teachers Recruitment Rules, 2016, invited applications for 13,421 posts across the state. The online application window opened at 3 pm on November 19, 2025, and closed at 11.59 pm on December 9, 2025.
Bera claimed that the recruitment notification had been published only online. Since he lived in a rural village in Purba Medinipur, he said he had not come across the advertisement while applications were being accepted. According to his submission, he learnt about the recruitment only on October 27, 2026, well after the deadline had passed.
Board says correction window did not allow fresh applications
Seeking to rely on the Board's October 14, 2026 notification, Bera argued that the recruitment process was still in progress because counselling and document verification were yet to take place. He also pointed out that the application portal had been reopened to enable candidates to modify their particulars until October 31, 2026.
The Board opposed the petition, disputing the claim that the recruitment advertisement had been made available only on its website. It told the Court that notices inviting applications had also appeared in several newspapers and submitted copies of those publications.
The Board further clarified that the October 14 notification was intended only to allow candidates who had already applied under the OBC-A and OBC-B categories to update or modify their category particulars. It did not reopen the recruitment process or permit fresh applications, it submitted.
The Board also argued that allowing Bera to apply after the deadline would open the floodgates to similar claims from other candidates who had failed to submit applications within the prescribed period.
Court says candidate had notice of recruitment
Accepting the Board's submissions, the High Court held that the newspaper advertisements demonstrated that the recruitment notification had been brought to the attention of the public at large. The Court rejected Bera's contention that his residence in a rural part of Purba Medinipur could excuse his failure to apply within the stipulated period.
"In view of the aforesaid publications in newspapers, the petitioner is deemed to have had knowledge and notice of the fact that applications had been invited by the concerned respondents," the Court observed.
The Court also held that the petitioner could not claim any benefit merely because he lived in a rural village, and found that he had failed to establish any procedural lapse by the authorities in conducting the recruitment process.
It clarified that the October 14 notification did not create a fresh opportunity for candidates who had not applied earlier. The reopening of the portal was confined to correcting or modifying particulars in applications already submitted.
Holding that Bera had no legal right to submit a fresh application after the prescribed deadline, Justice Medora dismissed the writ petition.