The State Of West Bengal & Anr vs Prabir Kumar Roy & Ors
2022 Latest Caselaw 7421 Cal

10.   09.11.2022
       Ct. No.6
      Tanmoy


                                      M.A.T. 1308 of 2022

                               The State of West Bengal & Anr.
                                           -Versus-
                                  Prabir Kumar Roy & Ors.

                                             With
                                    IA No: C.A.N. 1 of 2022
                                             With
                                    IA No: C.A.N. 2 of 2022


                         Mr. Swapan Kr. Datta, Ld Sr. Adv. & AGP,
                         Mr. Tapas Kr. Dey, Adv.,
                         Mr. Soumyadip Panda, Adv.

                                            ...for the appellants/State.

                         Mr. Chittapriya Ghosh, Adv.,
                         Ms. Priyanka Saha, Adv.

                                            ...for the respondent no.1/

writ petitioner.

Ms. Chandrani Bhattacharya, Adv., Ms. Bhargabi Banerjee, Adv.

...for the Kamarhati Municipality.

In Re: IA No: C.A.N. 1 of 2022

This is an application for condonation of delay of

one hundred (100) days in filing the appeal, as noted by

the Stamp Reporter. Causes shown being sufficient, the

delay is condoned. The application being IA No: C.A.N. 1

of 2022 in M.A.T. 1308 of 2022 is disposed of.

In Re: M.A.T. 1308 of 2022 With IA No: C.A.N. 2 of 2022

The respondent no.1/writ petitioner was initially

engaged as 'Majdoor' under Kamarhati Municipality.

Subsequently, he was promoted to the post of

Conservancy Inspector and thereafter to the post of

Collecting Sarkar.

With the grievance that upon his retirement, the

pension that he is being paid does not take into

consideration the aforesaid two promotions, the writ

petitioner approached the learned Single Judge. By the

order impugned in this appeal, the writ petition was

disposed of with the following directions:

"In consideration of the Government Orders dated 28th June, 2004 and 7th May, 2009 and also placing reliance on the unreported judgment of the Hon'ble Division Bench dated 19th March, 2021 in Baidyabati Municipality (supra) this Court directs the concerned respondent authorities to process and finalize the pension case of the petitioner on taking into account the promotions made in favour of the petitioner first as Conservancy Inspector and subsequently as Collecting Sarkar and release the retiral dues on issuing pension payment order within the period of twelve weeks from the date of communication of this order. While settling the pension case of the petitioner respondent authorities are also directed, if required, to accord post facto approval in favour of the petitioner in respect of his service which he rendered as Conservancy Inspector and subsequently as Collecting Sarkar."

The State has come up in appeal.

Learned Advocate for the Municipality on

instruction says that the promotions were granted to the

writ petitioner following the practice and convention that

was prevalent at the relevant point of time. There were no

specific service rules at that time. In view of the

satisfactory performance of the writ petitioner, the two

promotions were granted to him. He should be entitled to

compensation upon consideration of the said two

promotions.

The State says that there was no sanctioned

vacancy in the two promotional posts concerned, as

required by the Government Order dated May 7, 2009,

which is extracted in the order under appeal.

We notice that the Municipality did not file any

affidavit before the learned Single Judge. We are of the

view that the stand of the Municipality should be brought

on record by way of an affidavit.

Let affidavit-in-opposition to the stay petition be

filed within two weeks from date (23.11.2022). Reply

thereto, if any, be filed within a week thereafter

(30.11.2022).

List the matter under the same heading three weeks

hence (30.11.2022).

(Apurba Sinha Ray, J.) (Arijit Banerjee, J.)