Calcutta High Court (Appellete Side)
Pragati Dutta vs The State Of West Bengal & Ors on 4 December, 2017
Author: Tapabrata Chakraborty
Bench: Tapabrata Chakraborty
1
04.12.2017
Item No. 21
Ct. No.15
AB
W.P. 24809 (W) of 2017
In the matter of: Pragati Dutta.
-versus -
The State of West Bengal & Ors.
Mr. Samarendra Nath Biswas
....for the Petitioner
Mr. Supriyo Chattopadhyay
Mr. Sabyasachi Mondal
.... For the State
Affidavit of service filed by the petitioner is kept on
record.
The subject matter of challenge in the present writ
petition is an order dated 25th August, 2017 passed by the
respondent No. 4.
Mr. Biswas, learned advocate appearing for the petitioner submits that the petitioner's husband died-in- harness on 17th April, 2011. The deceased teacher was suffering from lung cancer. For adequate treatment of her husband the petitioner had to obtain loan. Due to the loss of the sole bread earner the petitioner submitted an application for grant of compassionate appointment. Such prayer was initially rejected by an order dated 10th September, 2015. Aggrieved thereby the petitioner approached this Court by a writ petition being W.P. 2 3033(W) of 2016 and the same was disposed of on 8th February, 2017 setting aside the order dated 10th September, 2015 and directing the concerned authority "to reconsider the case of the petitioner apart from the provisions of the Government order dated 09.7.2009." The order impugned in the present writ petition has been passed without following the directives contained in the order passed by this Court in the earlier writ petition and as such the impugned order is a nullity. Such contention has however been disputed by the learned advocate appearing for the State respondents and he submits that no medical documents could be produced by the petitioner and that the petitioner does not come within the zone of consideration in terms of the relevant rule.
Upon hearing the learned advocates appearing for the respective parties and upon considering the materials on record, I am of the opinion that the matter needs to be decided upon exchange of affidavits.
Accordingly, the respondents are directed to file their affidavits-in-opposition within two weeks after the X- mass vacation. Reply, thereto, if any be filed within one week thereafter.
3
List this matter for further consideration in the daily supplementary list of this Court on 30th January, 2018.
(Tapabrata Chakraborty, J.)