Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 0, Cited by 0]

Calcutta High Court (Appellete Side)

Surajit Banerjee vs The State Of West Bengal & Ors on 7 January, 2026

Author: Rajasekhar Mantha

Bench: Rajasekhar Mantha

07-01-2026
 ct no. 13
  Sl. 3
    pk

                           FMA 1128 of 2025
                                 With
                            CAN 1 of 2025
                            Surajit Banerjee
                             -Versus-
                    The State of West Bengal & Ors.


             Mr. Anindya Lahiri, ld. Sr. Adv.
             Mr. Samrat Dey Paul,
             Mr. Anish Chakraborty.

                                                ...for the appellant.

             Mr. Santanu Kr. Mitra, ld. Sr. Govt. Adv.
             Mr. Amartya Pal.
                                                   ..for the State.

             Mr. Srijan Nayak,
             Mrs. Rituparna Maitra.
                      ..for the Co-operative Election Commission.



             1.    Despite service of notice, the Co-operative

                   Society and the Board are not represented.

             2.    The instant appeal is directed against an

                   order dated 10th June, 2025 passed by a

                   Single Bench of this Court whereby and

                   whereunder     WPA    27294     of   2024   was

                   dismissed.

             3.    The writ petitioner/appellant was the highest

                   paid employee of the Alipore Sub-Division

                   Central Fishermen's Co-operative Society Ltd.

                   He was a paid employee and Manager. He was
                           2




     designated as CEO's when an earlier CEO

     term was over. During his tenure it was found

     that some Board Members who ought to have

     been reelected and are on the Board of the

     society as on date, may have misappropriated

     sums of money. Based on the said allegation,

     the Assistant Director of Fisheries, South 24-

     Parganas whose office appoints CEO to the

     Co-operative Societies like that of the instant

     case, has ordered an inquiry.

4.   The       grievance             raised         by     the

     petitioner/appellant before the Single Bench,

     was    three-fold,       that   a   regular     CEO   be

     appointed to the Society by the Board or the

     State and for completion of enquiry into the

     alleged allegation         of defalcation. A        third

     prayer was also made by the petitioner for

     release of unpaid salary as CEO.

5.   This Court is of the view that the appeal could

     be    disposed   of       directing      the   concerned

     Registrar of Co-operative Societies, to ensure

     completion of the pending enquiry into the

     defalcation of funds by two Board Members,

     i.e. a sum of Rs. 1.52 lakhs and Rs. 1.20

     lakhs by cheque Nos. 720067 and 720068

     sometime in the year 2024 by the already
                         3




      appointed Inquiry Officer or by appointment

      of a fresh enquiry officer.

6.    For the aforesaid purpose, the report of the

      statutory auditor Mr. Pinaki P Chakraborty

      may be considered by the enquiry authority.

7.    The Board of Directors may take steps for

      appointment of new CEO in terms of the Act

      of     2006.      The         prayer    of   the

      petitioner/appellant for release of his unpaid

      salary shall also be decided upon by the

      newly elected Board and a decision in that

      regard shall be communicated to the writ

      petitioner/appellant.

8.    Let the aforesaid directions be complied with

      by the concerned authority, within a period of

      2 months from the date of communication of

      a copy of this order.

9.    For     the      aforesaid        purpose,   the

      petitioner/appellant may supply all necessary

      documents and make a fresh representation

      to the appropriate authority including the

      Board and the concerned Registrar.

10.   With the aforesaid direction, FMA 1128 of

      2025 shall stand disposed of.

11.   Consequently, CAN 1 of 2025 shall also stand

      disposed of.
                        4




12.   There shall be no order as to costs.

13.   Since no affidavits have been called from the

      respondents, the allegations contained in the

stay application shall not be deemed to have been admitted.

14. All parties shall act on the server copy of this order duly downloaded from the official website of this Court.

(Rajasekhar Mantha, J.) (Ajay Kumar Gupta, J.)