Calcutta High Court (Appellete Side)
Tarkeswar Tiwari vs The Union Of India & Ors on 24 August, 2022
Author: Arindam Mukherjee
Bench: Arindam Mukherjee
IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA
CONSTITUTIONAL WRIT JURISDICTION
APPELLATE SIDE
24.08.2022
Item No. 05
Court No.23
(Suvendu)
WPA 12832 of 2022
Tarkeswar Tiwari
Vs.
The Union of India & Ors.
Mr. Ziaul Islam
...............for the petitioner
Mr. Sourav Sengupta
............for the respondents
The learned advocate representing the respondents on instruction submits that the enquiry proceedings much before the filing of the instant writ petition had been transferred from Purulia to Durgapur wherein the petitioner was posted. The learned advocate for the respondents makes over to Court a document dated 1st August, 2022 which he received from the 169 Battalion as instruction. The document is an unsigned one and also does not contain any supportive document to show that the enquiry proceedings had stood transferred from Purulia to Durgapur prior to filing of the writ petition. The same is taken on record. Learned advocate for the petitioner did not point out this transfer when the order dated 16 th August, 2 2022 was passed. Had this been brought to the notice of the Court, then the order dated 20 th July, 2022 directing the learned advocate representing the respondents to take necessary instructions for shifting the enquiry proceedings at a nearby place to Durgapur would not have been passed.
The learned advocate for the petitioner, however, says that he did not have the instruction regarding the transfer of the enquiry proceedings as submitted by the learned advocate for the respondents. In fact, the said learned advocate submits that he is hearing about the transfer for the first time. It is also submitted on behalf of the petitioner that the petitioner has now been transferred to Gwalior and as such the transfer of the enquiry proceedings to Durgapur, even if has been made, will not enure to the benefit and his difficulties and hardship to attend the court of enquiry at Durgapur from the present place of posting at Gwalior will continue. It is also submitted that a separate writ petition challenging the transfer order has been filed.
Disputing this submissions made on behalf of the petitioner, the learned advocate for the respondents say that though a transfer order was initially issued against the petitioner transferring him from Durgapur to Gwalior but such transfer 3 order is kept in abeyance for a period of one year. The petitioner is still working at Durgapur and as such can conveniently participate in the enquiry proceedings.
In the light of the assertion and denial as recorded hereinabove and the submissions made on behalf of the parties, I direct the respondents to produce the documents showing the transfer of the enquiry proceedings from Purulia to Durgapur prior to filing of the writ petition as also a document and/or order showing that the petitioner's transfer to Gwalior has been kept in abeyance for one year and the petitioner is serving at present in Durgapur in his old place of posting. Such document be furnished by the respondents on the returnable date.
Let this matter appear on 31st August, 2022.
(Arindam Mukherjee, J.)