Calcutta High Court (Appellete Side)
Chaitali Mitra vs The State Of West Bengal & Ors on 3 April, 2023
03.04.2023 IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA
DL-49 CONSTITUTIONAL WRIT JURISDICTION
(PP) APPELLATE SIDE
WPA 6499 of 2023
Chaitali Mitra
Vs.
The State of West Bengal & Ors.
Mr. Anjan Bhattacharya,
Ms. Anita Shaw
....for the petitioner.
Mr. Tapan Kumar Mukherjee, AGP,
Ms. Saheli Mukherjee
....for the State.
Supplementary affidavit filed in Court today is
retained with the records.
By an order dated January 16, 2023, this Court
directed the authorities concerned to consider the
representation of the petitioner for compassionate
appointment in the light of the Special Bench
Judgment of this Hon'ble Court in F.M.A. 1277 of
2015 (State of West Bengal & Ors. vs. Purnima Das
& Ors.). A personal hearing was given to the
petitioner on March 3, 2023 by the Deputy Inspector
General of Police & State Commandant, Nadia.
Mr. Bhattacharya, learned counsel appearing on
behalf of the petitioner submits that the findings of
the Enquiry Officer that the petitioner was not
dependent on the deceased employee of West Bengal
National Volunteer Force/her father was not based on
2
any relevant material. He submits that it was the
duty of the Enquiry Officer to base his findings on
records. The Enquiry Officer found that the petitioner
got married in 2011 based on her statements. After
her marriage she has been residing with her husband
in village - Poligram, Purba Bardhaman. The
petitioner has a son of aged 11 years and her
husband owns a piece of agricultural land
approximately 5 bighas and is a farmer by occupation
and living in his own house with family. The
petitioner has also stated that the distance between
her paternal home and in-laws house is a walking
distance of 30 minutes and motorable distance of 10
minutes. The petitioner keeps on commuting
between both the houses without any inhibition. The
petitioner also stated during enquiry that since her
father died in September 21, 2013, she stayed some
times with her mother due to old age and presently
she is staying with her husband and in-laws in the
same house after the demise of her mother. On
enquiry, whether the petitioner faced any physical or
mental harassment from her husband or his family
members, she has declined the same and stated
affirmatively that she never faced any such problem.
Mr. Bhattacharya also relies on a document
issued by the Prodhan, Murgram-Gopalpur Gram
3
Panchayat dated February 27, 2023 in order to
evidence the fact that the petitioner used to stay with
her mother and was dependent on her.
Mr. Mukherjee, learned Additional Government
Pleader appears on behalf of the State-respondents.
Considering the submissions of the parties and
the materials placed on record, this Court is of the
view that the representation of the petitioner was
considered by the Deputy Inspector General of Police
& State Commandant on the basis of the statements
made by the petitioner during the hearing. As such,
any denial of such statements made before the
Enquiry Officer would be a serious disputed question
of fact.
In such view of the matter, this Court is not
inclined to go into such disputed questions of fact in
adjudication of the present writ petition. This Court
has no reason not to believe the statements made in
the reasoned order by the Deputy Inspector General
of Police & State Commandant/Enquiry Officer on
March 3, 2023.
In the view of this Court, the writ petition is
misconceived.
In the light of the discussions above, WPA 6499
of 2023 is dismissed.
Since no affidavits have been directed to be
exchanged in the writ petition, all the allegations
contained therein are deemed not to have been
admitted by the parties.
All parties shall act on the server copies of this
order duly downloaded from the official website of
this Hon'ble Court.
Urgent photostat certified copies of this order, if
applied for, be supplied to the parties upon
compliance of all necessary formalities.
(Lapita Banerji, J.)
