Calcutta High Court (Appellete Side)
(Union Of India & Ors vs Rajat Kumar on 5 July, 2023
14
05.07.2023
Ct. No. 11
rrc
WP.CT. 77 of 2022
(Union of India & Ors. Vs. Rajat Kumar
Samanta & Ors.)
Mr. Kushi Rasun Chatterjee
..... For the petitioners
Mr. Achintya Kumar Banerjee
Ms. Indumouli Banerjee
..... For the respondents
The present writ petition has been preferred
challenging an order dated 24th January, 2022 passed by
the learned Tribunal in the original application being OA
No. 350/00679/2021 preferred by the
applicants/respondents in the present petition
challenging, inter alia, an order dated 13th July, 2020
passed by the PFA(Admn)/CLW/Chittaranjan by which
the authorities refused to grant the benefits of 'split duty'
allowance to the respondents.
Mr. Chatterjee, learned advocate appearing for the
petitioners herein submits that as per the 7th CPC as
accepted by the Government of India, the claim of 'split
duty' allowance had been radically changed and there are
specific categories of employees who can be granted such
allowance. The respondents herein do not fall in those
categories and as such, they are not entitled to the
allowances.
According to Mr. Chatterjee, the arguments as
advanced on behalf of the petitioners herein were not
taken into consideration by the learned Tribunal and the
impugned order was passed without appreciating that
the respondents herein are ministerial staff and they are
not similarly circumstanced with the respondents in the
case of 'Union of India & Ors. Vs. Sukumar Dutta &
Ors' and are not entitled to the benefits of the judgment
delivered by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the said case.
Per contra, Mr. Banerjee, learned advocate appearing
for the respondents submits that the petitioners have
filed the present writ petition with the sole intent to delay
the disbursement of the benefits in favour of the
respondents, whose claim stands fortified by the
judgment delivered in the case of Union of India (supra)
as well as the judgment delivered by a coordinate Bench
of this Court in WP.CT 218 of 2009, WP.CT 219 of 2009
and WP.CT 73 of 2009.
Heard the learned advocates appearing for the
respective parties and considered the materials on
record.
By the order impugned in the present application, the
learned Tribunal has only directed the writ petitioners to
consider the claim of the respondents herein in the light
of the decisions as contained in the original application
and to pass necessary orders within a period of three
months from the date of receipt of a copy of the order. It
has also been observed in the said order that 'in the
event the applicants seem to be identically circumstanced
to the said employees, appropriate benefits be released
within a further period of one month, and, in that case
benefits would be actual from the date of this order and
notional from the date the applicants are adjudged eligible
for the said benefits'.
It appears that the present application was filed
belatedly after 127 days and in the midst thereof, the
respondents have denied to comply with the directions.
The learned tribunal upon dealing with all the factual
issues arrived at a finding and issued directions upon
the petitioners observing, inter alia, that in the event the
applicants seem to be identically circumstanced to the
employees in the earlier proceedings, appropriate
benefits should be released within a period of one month.
Such directions are supported with reasons and the
same do not cause any prejudice to the writ petitioners
herein.
We do not find any error in such directions, least to
say any patent error of law in the same. The impugned
order does not suffer from any jurisdictional error or any
manifest injustice warranting interference of this Court.
Accordingly, the writ petition being WP.CT. 77 of
2022 is dismissed.
There shall, however, be no order as to costs.
All parties shall act on the server copies of this order
duly downloaded from the official website of this Court.
(Partha Sarathi Chatterjee, J.) (Tapabrata Chakraborty, J.)
