Calcutta High Court (Appellete Side)
Company Limited & Ors vs West Bengal State Electricity ... on 29 July, 2022
29.07.2022.
Item Nos. 28-31.
Court No.13
Saswata
CAN 1 of 2022
R.V.W. No. 134 of 2022
West Bengal State Electricity Transmission
Company Limited & Ors.
Versus
West Bengal State Electricity Board Engineers
Association & Ors.
And
CAN 1 of 2022
R.V.W. No. 135 of 2022
West Bengal State Electricity Distribution
Company Limited & Ors.
Versus
West Bengal State Electricity Board Engineers
Association & Ors.
And
CPAN 324 of 2022
In
W.P.A. No. 3292 of 2019
West Bengal State Electricity Board Engineers'
Association & Anr.
Versus
Santanu Basu, Managing Director, West Bengal
State Electricity Transmission Company Limited &
Anr.
And
CPAN 322 of 2022
In
W.P.A. No. 12082 of 2019
West Bengal State Electricity Board Engineers'
Association & Anr.
Versus
Santanu Basu, Managing Director, West Bengal
State Electricity Transmission Company Limited &
Anr.
Mr. Soumya Majumdar,
Ms. Sanjukta Dutta.
...For the petitioners.
Mr. S.N.Mookerjee, Sr. Adv.
Mr. Biswaroop Bhattacharya,
Mr. Saaqib Siddiqui,
Mr. Aviroop Mitra.
...For the alleged contemnors
(CPAN 322 of 2022
CPAN 324 of 2022)
... For the review applicants
(RVW 134 of 2022)
(RVW 135 of 2022).
In re : RVW 134 of 2022 & RVW 135 of 2022
Affidavit of service filed in Court be taken on
record.
A short question that arises for consideration in
the review applications is as to whether by the
judgment dated 13th March 2020, contempt whereof is
being examined by this Court, any benefits outside the
scope of ROPA 2009 were either granted to the
petitioners or were in fact prayed for in the writ
petition. The issue has been raised by the learned
Advocate General on behalf of the employers since
after coming into force of ROPA 2020 in January
2020, the petitioners in harmony with their claims in
the writ petition, cannot claim anything outside ROPA
2020.
In this regard, the first paragraph of the 19th
page of the judgment dated 13th March 2020 is
reiterated by Ld. counsel for the writ petitioner. Mr.
Mukherjee, Learned Advocate General however refer to
the first paragraph of page 17 of the said judgment
and also other paragraphs in the writ petition.
The first question however that needs to be
addressed by the learned counsel for either side and
they cannot be but ad idem is as to whether the
judgment that has been confirmed by the Division
Bench of the Hon'ble Supreme Court which has later
on refused to review its decision, can even be reopened
in review by this Court.
Learned Advocate General however submits that
the order of the Hon'ble Supreme Court only
dismissed the Special Leave Petition against the
judgment of the Division Bench. Apart from the
principles of res judicata, counsels have also urged
the application of the doctrine of merger.
Let affidavit-in-opposition be filed by the writ
petitioners within a period of ten days. Reply, be filed
within a period of one week thereafter.
In re : CPAN 322 of 2022 & CPAN 324 of 2022
Since two out of five installments for payment of
arrears have already been paid by the employers, the
restraint on the Managing Directors and the General
Managers of the two companies from receiving their
salaries, allowances and arrears shall cease.
Mr. Majumdar submits that given the financial
health of M/s WBSETCL, the arrears as ordered by
the judgment dated 13th March 2020 can be definitely
paid by the Company in one go. The alleged
contemnors shall bear in mind the above.
Let the contempt applications along with the
review applications be listed on 2nd September 2022.
The personal appearance of the alleged
contemnors is dispensed with.
All parties shall act on the server copy of this
order duly downloaded from the official website of this
Court.
(Rajasekhar Mantha, J.)
