Calcutta High Court (Appellete Side)
Banibrata Datta & Ors vs The State Of West Bengal & Ors on 8 February, 2023
Court No. 22 IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA
08.02.2023 Constitutional Writ Jurisdiction
(Item No. 91
Appellate Side
& 92) W.P.A. 18792 of 2019
(AB)
Banibrata Datta & Ors.
VS
The State of West Bengal & Ors
With
W.P.A. 11127 of 2021
Vikramjit Sen & Ors.
VS
The State of West Bengal & Ors
Mr. Soumya Majumder
Mr. Samrat Dey Paul
..... for the petitioner in WPA 18792 of 2019
Mr. Saptangshu Basu
Mr. Ayan Banerjee
Ms. Debasree Dhamali
Ms. Riya Ghosh
.... For the petitioners in WPA 11127 of 2021
Mr. Pratik Dhar
Mr. Debabrata Chatterjee
Mr. Simanta Kabir
.... For respondent Nos. 2-4/State
Mr. Kallol Basu
Mr. Siddhartha Banerjee
Mr. Sudipta Nayan Ghosh
.... For High Court Administration
The issue involved in both these two writ
petitions are interlinked. In view of the Shetty
Commission's report which was accepted by the
Hon'ble Supreme Court in the matter of All India
Judges' Association and Others Vs. Union of India
& Ors. reported at (2002) 4 Supreme Court Cases
247, the petitioners being the Judicial Officers of the
State claimed the benefit of Shetty Commission's
recommendation for three advance increments at
every stage of pay fixation of their career those
who possesses with the L.L.M. degree. The State
initially issued a notification on January 18, 2008 at
page 36 to the writ petition being W.P.A. 11127 of
2021 (for short, in the matter of Vikramjit Sen). The
State then issued further notification dated
September 14, 2018 changing the nomenclature
from advance to additional increments at page 35
to the said writ petition in the matter of Vikramjit Sen.
The State then issued another notification dated
January 7, 2019 at page 61 to the writ petition in
the matter of Vikramjit Sen. In the said notification
the State, inter alia, under Clause 7 mentioned that,
at the time of any fixation of pay on promotion to
higher cadre, the officers having the Post Graduation
in Law will be entitled to three additional increments
than the officers not having the Post Graduation in
Law. The State then issued two further notifications,
namely, August 16, 2019 at page 63 to the writ
petition in the matter of Vikramjit Sen whereby the
said notification dated January 7, 2019 was kept in
abeyance and then issued the notification dated
September 12, 2019 at page 64 to the said writ
petition in the matter of Vikramjit Sen where under
the State withdrew its earlier notification dated
January 7, 2019. In the said writ petition in the
matter of Vikramjit Sen writ petitioners challenged the
said three notifications dated August 16, 2019,
September 12, 2019 and February 10, 2021 to the
writ petition at page 78 to the said writ petition in the
matter of Vikramjit Sen.
In the second writ petition i.e. W.P.A. 18792
of 2019 in the matter of Banibrata Datta & Ors. Vs.
the State of West Bengal & Ors. (for short, in the
matter of Banibrata Datta) the petitioners have
challenged the said notifications dated August 16,
2019 and September 12, 2019.
Mr. Saptangsu Basu, learned counsel
appearing for the petitioners in the matter of
Vikramjit Sen & Ors. had concluded his argument in
support of the writ petition.
Mr. soumya Majumder, learned counsel
appearing for the petitioners in the matter of
Banibrata Datta & Ors. had also concluded his
submissions in support of the writ petition.
Mr. Pratick Dhar, learned senior counsel
appearing for the State had commenced his
submissions. At the outset he drew attention of this
court at paragraph 40 of the judgment of the Hon'ble
Supreme court. In the matter of: All India Judges'
Association (Supra). The relevant two paragraphs
from the said judgment are quoted below.
" 37. Subject to the various modifications
in this judgment, all other recommendations of
the Shetty Commission are accepted.
40. Any clarification that may be required
in respect of any matter arising out of this
decision will be sought only from this Court. The
proceedings, if any, for implementation of the
directions given in this judgment shall be filed
only in this Court and no other Court shall
entertain them."
On the basis of the observation of the Hon'ble
Supreme Court paragraph 40 quoted above, Mr. Dhar
took a preliminary objection as to the entertainability
of the writ petition by this Court.
In view of the objection raised by Mr. Dhar,
learned senior counsel for the State, this Court thinks
it fit that, on this objection both the petitioners in the
said two writ petitions and the High Court
Administration shall have to be heard at the out set.
On the joint prayers of the parties, the writ
petitions shall be considered further on February 15,
2023 under the heading "For Orders".
A copy this order shall also be placed in the file
of the analogous writ petition .
(Aniruddha Roy, J.)
