Apan Kumar Roy vs The State Of West Bengal And Ors
2022 Latest Caselaw 633 Cal/2

OD-1

                              ORDER SHEET

                             WPO/526/2022

                  IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA
                 CONSTITUTIONAL WRIT JURISDICTION
                           ORIGINAL SIDE

                         APAN KUMAR ROY
                              Versus
                THE STATE OF WEST BENGAL AND ORS.

  BEFORE:
  The Hon'ble JUSTICE SHAMPA SARKAR
  Date : 23rd February, 2022.

  [Via Video Conference]
                                                                        Appearance:
                                                       Mr. Anjan Bhattacharya, Adv.
                                                               Ms. Anita Shaw, Adv.
                                                                   For the petitioner.

                                                     Ms. Chaitali Bhattacharya, Adv.
                                                   Mr. Subhendu Roychoudhury, Adv.
                                                          For the State Respondents.

The Court :- The allegations are that the services of the petitioner

was utilized by the authorities for 16 years but the retirement benefits

were not paid as the petitioner was over age at the time of appointment.

Ms. Bhattacharya, learned Advocate appearing on behalf of the

respondents, submits that due to the shifting of the offices, the

appointment letter of the petitioner who was allegedly appointed as a

Gram Sevak/Secretary under Bahirgachhi Gram Panchayet was not

available with the records and as such the respondents were not able to

address the contentions of the writ petitioner made in this writ petition.

The records annexed to the writ petition reveals that the petitioner had

been appointed sometime on January 15, 2004. It is submitted that the

petitioner was appointed on temporary basis.

Mr. Bhattacharya, learned Advocate for the petitioner, refutes such

contention and submits that the petitioner was called for an interview by

the District Magistrate concerned and he was appointed against a

substantive post, subsequently.

However, without going into the rival contentions of the parties, the

writ petition is disposed of with a direction upon the Commissioner,

Department of Panchayet and Rural Development, the respondent No. 3,

to dispose of the writ petition as a representation upon hearing the

petitioner. The petitioner last worked as the Executive Assistant in the

office of the Habibpur Gram Panchayet under Ranaghat-I Block and the

petitioner has completed a total length of 16 years of qualifying service,

as alleged. The concerned Block Development Officer as also the

authorities of Habibpur Gram Panchayet, shall also be heard. The

petitioner shall be entitled to be represented by a learned Advocate. The

petitioner shall also be entitled to refer to all documents in support of his

contentions. The petitioner shall further be entitled to refer to all

judgments of this Court on the question of condonation of age bar passed

under similar circumstances.

A reasoned order will be passed and communicated to all. The

factual aspect as to whether the petitioner was in permanent service or

not, must also be considered by the authority.

The petitioner is directed to correct the cause title with regard to

the address of the respondent no.3 and a copy of the writ petition along

with annexures and also a server copy of the order be served upon the

respondent no.3.

(SHAMPA SARKAR, J)

snn.