Citation : 2023 Latest Caselaw 225 Cal
Judgement Date : 9 January, 2023
20 09.01.2023
Ct.15
W.P.A. 21987 of 2013
rkd
Subhra Chaudhuri
-vs-
State of West Bengal & Ors.
Mr. Ekramul Bari,
Mr. S. M. Ali,
Ms. Tanuja Basak
....for the petitioner.
Mr. Santanu Kumar Mitra,
...for the State.
In the present writ petition the decision of
the District Inspector of Schools (S.E.), Kolkata
dated 8th May, 2013 is under challenge whereby
prayer of the petitioner for sanctioning two
additional increments for acquiring Ph.D was
turned down.
It has been submitted by Mr. Bari, learned
advocate representing the petitioner that she was
awarded Ph.D on 3rd May, 2007 and reliance has
been placed on Government Order dated 5th
January, 2012 issued by the Joint Secretary,
School Education Department whereby a cut off
date has been fixed i.e. 18th August, 2005 for grant
of incremental benefits for acquiring Ph.D.
According to the petitioner such fixation of cut off
date vide circular dated 5th January, 2012 has been
negated by a coordinate Bench by delivering
2
judgment therefore on the strength of this circular
dated 5th January, 2012 claim of the petitioner for
grant of two additional increments cannot be
ignored.
Mr. Mitra, learned senior Government
advocate appears for the State respondents who
has defended the decision of the District Inspector
of Schools (S.E.), Kolkata on placing reliance on the
judgment of the Division Bench dated 5th April,
2019 on an intra Court appeal being FMA 2368 of
2015 (State of West Bengal & Ors. -vs- Gautam
Ghosh & Ors.).
This Court on perusal of this judgement
dated 5th April, 2019 finds that on similar
circumstances claim of respondent no.1 for grant of
incremental benefits on acquiring Ph.D was
negated in consideration of the provisions of ROPA
2009 which came into existence with effect from 1st
January, 2006.
In the present case petitioner obtained Ph.D
on 3rd May, 2007 which is admittedly after coming
into effect of ROPA 2009. There is also no dispute
with regard to the provisions of ROPA 2009 which
does not empower the authorities to grant two
additional increments for obtaining Ph.D from the
date of convocation on which such degree is
awarded.
In view of the aforesaid facts relating to the
date on which petitioner obtained Ph.D and placing
reliance on the decision of the Hon'ble Division
Bench in Gautam Ghosh (Supra), this Court does
not find merit in the writ petition and accordingly
the writ petition stands dismissed.
However, there shall be no order as to
costs.
Urgent photostat certified copy of this
order, if applied for, be given to the learned
Advocates for the parties on the usual
undertakings.
(Saugata Bhattacharyya, J.)
Publish Your Article
Campus Ambassador
Media Partner
Campus Buzz
LatestLaws.com presents: Lexidem Offline Internship Program, 2026
LatestLaws.com presents 'Lexidem Online Internship, 2026', Apply Now!