Calcutta High Court (Appellete Side)
Dr. Somnath Koley vs The State Of West Bengal Ors on 16 July, 2018
Author: Shekhar B. Saraf
Bench: Shekhar B. Saraf
1
16.07.2018
ss
1
W.P.1379 (W) of 2018
Dr. Somnath Koley
Vs.
The State of West Bengal ors.
Mr. Ujjal Roy
Mr. Arpa Chakraborty
... For the petitioner
Mrs. Chaitali Bhattacharya
Mr. Mrinal Kanti Ghosh ... For the State
This is an application under Article 226 of the Constitution of India
wherein the writ petitioner is aggrieved by the inaction on behalf of the school
authorities with reference to the incremental benefit he has sought for after
acquiring the Ph.D. Degree in the year 2011.
The school authorities are not represented inspite of service.
It is the case of the writ petitioner that the writ petitioner upon acquiring
the Ph.D. Degree, he is entitled to two incremental benefits. He supports
arguments based on an order passed in W.P. No.4532(W) of 2012 dated July 4,
2012 wherein the learned Single Judge of this Court had held that the West
Bengal School (Control of Expenditure) Act, 2005 would not act as a bar to such
increment.
Ms. Chaitali Bhattacharya, learned Counsel on behalf of the
respondent/State authorities submits that there was some confusion with regard
to this aspect and therefore, a reference was made on the decision of a learned Single Judge of this Court before the Hon'ble Chief Justice. Upon such reference 2 being made the matter was referred to a Division Bench of this Court wherein the Division Bench in Anupam Samanta Vs. State of West Bengal & ors. (W.P.25103(W) of 2012) categorically held as follows:-
"Thus, we hold that introduction of ROPA in 2009 with effect from 1st January, 2006 and acceptance of the benefit thereof by the petitioner does not prevent him from claiming higher scale of pay for his Ph.D. degree which, in fact, was acquired by him on 18th May, 2005 when provisional certificate was given to him, notwithstanding the fact that convocation was held on 3rd March, 2006 when the final certificate was given to him.
Be it mentioned here that if somebody acquires Ph.D. Degree on 3rd March, 2006 he is not entitled to get the incremental benefits under ROPA, 2009 which is silent about grant of such benefit to any teacher acquiring Ph.D. Degree under the said ROPA which came into effect on 1st January, 2006. We made it clear that since the petitioner, in fact, acquired Ph.D. Degree on 18th May, 2005, i.e. prior to 2009 ROPA came into effect, his claim cannot be considered in the light of ROPA, 2009."
From the above judgement, it becomes clear that if a person accepts ROPA, 2009, he cannot claim incremental benefit as there is no provision for such incremental benefit in ROPA, 2009.
Ms. Chaitali Bhattacharya, further submits that the judgement referred to by the petitioner is under challenge in appeal and the same has been stayed by the Appeal Court.
In light of the above, I am of the view that the petitioner herein who has opted for ROPA, 2009 cannot claim any benefit of increment based on his having acquired additional degree during his service period. 3
With the above observations, this writ petition is dismissed without however, any order as to costs.
All parties are to act on the website copy of this order.
,,, (Shekhar B. Saraf, J.)