Calcutta High Court (Appellete Side)
Santosh Kumar Thakur & Others vs Comptroller & Auditor General Of India & ... on 4 October, 2024
04.10.2024
rpan/17
WPCT 179 of 2015
Santosh Kumar Thakur & Others
- Versus -
Comptroller & Auditor General of India & Others
Mr. S. K. Datta,
Mr. Barun Chatterjee
... for the Petitioners.
Mr. Pinaki Bhattacharyya
... for the Respondent Nos.1-4.
Let the supplementary affidavit, as called for earlier
by this Court and the affidavit-in-reply, as filed on behalf
of the petitioners, be kept on record.
Mr. Datta, learned advocate appearing for the
petitioners submits that the original application (in short,
OA), being OA 778 of 2012 was preferred by the petitioners
challenging inter alia the provisions of CAG's Manual of
Standing Orders (Administrative) as contained in Chapter -
V regarding regularization and determination of seniority
of Section Officers (Audit), particularly the clauses 5.6.2.
and 5.6.6 in the said chapter. The said OA was, however,
dismissed placing reliance upon the judgment delivered in
the case of N. Srinivasa Prasad Vs. Comptroller & Auditor
General of India & Others, reported in 2007 (10) SCC 246.
Drawing our attention to an earlier order passed by
a co-ordinate Bench of this Court on 18 th April, 2019, Mr.
Datta submits that the writ petition was admitted since
the order passed in the petitioners' OA was contrary to the
order passed by the Central Administrative Tribunal,
Chandigarh Bench in an identical matter dealing with the
same issue and as an arguable case was made out by the
petitioners.
He submits that during pendency of the present writ
petition, the order of the Central Administrative Tribunal,
Chandigarh Bench was challenged before the Hon'ble High
Court of Himachal Pradesh at Shimla and by a judgment
dated 6th November, 2023 the order of the Central
Administrative Tribunal, Chandigarh Bench was affirmed.
A Special Leave Petition (in short, SLP) preferred against
the said judgment was also dismissed by an order dated
17th May, 2024.
Mr. Datta further argues that the petitioners' claim
in the OA was dismissed by the learned Tribunal placing
reliance upon the judgment delivered in the case of N.
Srinivasa Prasad (supra). However, the said judgment has
also been considered by the Hon'ble High Court of
Himachal Pradesh at Shimla while delivering the judgment
dated 6th November, 2023, as would be explicit from
paragraph 21 of the said judgment.
In the said conspectus, Mr. Datta submits that the
issue involved in the present writ petition is no longer res
integra. The copies of the judgment of the Central
Administrative Tribunal, Chandigarh Bench, the judgment
of the Hon'ble High Court of Himachal Pradesh at Shimla
and the order passed in the Special Leave Petition, as
produced, be kept on record.
The copies of the supplementary affidavit and the
affidavit-in-reply as well as the judgments upon which
reliance have been placed upon by Mr. Datta, have been
handed over to Mr. Bhattacharyya, learned advocate
appearing for the respondent nos.1 - 4.
Mr. Bhattacharyya prays for an accommodation
today to avail necessary instruction.
In view thereof, the matter stands adjourned.
List the matter for further consideration under the
heading 'To Be Mentioned' in the daily supplementary list
of this Court on 19th November, 2024.
(Biswaroop Chowdhury, J.) (Tapabrata Chakraborty, J.)
