Union Of India & Ors vs Bikash Raj
2021 Latest Caselaw 3445 Cal

28.06.2021
 SL No.4
Court No.16
    (gc)
                                      WPCT 30 of 2021

                                 Union of India & Ors.
                                          Vs.
                                     Bikash Raj

                                (Via Video Conference)

                                           Mr. Alok Kumar Banerjee,
                                           Mr. Santosh Kumar Pandey,
                                                           ...for the Petitioners.
                                           Mr. Ujjal Kr. Ray,
                                           Mr. Arpa Chakraborty,
                                                          ...for the Respondent.

We have heard the learned Counsel for the parties. It

has been fairly submitted on behalf of the private

respondent that the finding of the Tribunal in paragraph (iii)

is factually incorrect. The finding of the Tribunal in

paragraph (iii) reads:-

"(iii) The ASPO, KGP Sub Division is admittedly the one who has witnessed the incident complained of and has himself punished the applicant as his Disciplinary Authority."

If this is factually incorrect then the application of the

legal maxim Nemo debit in causa sua may not be applicable.

The learned Counsel for the private respondent

submits that in the written notes of argument he has raised

some other points showing likelihood of bias of ASPO, KGP

Sub Division and draws our attention to the order of the

enquiry officer during the enquiry proceeding whereby the

enquiry officer has recorded that amongst others, Sri

Aniruddha Biswas, ASPO, KGP Sub Division, Kharagpur

may be summoned as one of the witnesses. It is submitted

that Mr. Biswas in spite of issuance of summons did not

appear. However, there is no finding to that effect in the

Tribunal nor it has been reflected in the order passed by the

Tribunal.

In view of the argument that the point raised before

the Tribunal has not been considered in its proper

perspective and the said issue has not been discussed in the

judgment of the learned Tribunal although it formed part of

the pleading and written notes of submission, we set aside

the order.

The matter is remanded to the Tribunal for

reconsideration of the matter afresh. Since all the materials

are before the Tribunal, the parties shall only advance their

arguments along with their brief notes of argument if they so

desire. In the event notes of arguments are filed, it should

be exchanged so that both the parties can be aware of the

points raised by the other side. The Tribunal is requested to

dispose of the said application within a period of three

months from the date of communication of this order by

either of the parties. We make it clear that we have not gone

into the merits of the matter. The order of remand is

primarily on the ground that the aforesaid finding of the

Tribunal is an error apparent on the face of the record and

needs rectification.

With the aforesaid observation, the writ petition, being

WPCT 30 of 2021, stand disposed of.

All parties shall act on the server copies of this order

duly downloaded from the official website of this Court.

(Hiranmay Bhattacharyya, J.) (Soumen Sen, J.)