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)

Arindam Gupta vs The State Of W.B. & Ors on 23 February, 2024

Author: Kausik Chanda

Bench: Kausik Chanda

    41
23.02.2024
    ssi
  Ct. 238
                                   WPA 25176 of 2023

                                     Arindam Gupta
                                           -vs-
                                 The State of W.B. & ors.


                               Ms. Susmita Saha Dutta
                               Mr. Goutam Bhakat
                               Mr. Niladri Saha
                               Ms. Madhurima Basu

                                               ...for the petitioner
                               Ms. Debjani Sengupta
                               Ms. Shahina Haque
                               Ms. Koyel Bag
                               Mr. Abhijit Chatterjee
                               Ms. Jonaki Khan
                                      ...for the Vidyasagar University

                               Ms. Tapati Samanta
                               Mr. Arindam Ghosh

                                                     ...for the State



                   This matter was heard lastly on 30.01.2024, when the

             following order was passed:

                        "Ms. Susmita Saha Dutta, learned advocate
                       appearing for the petitioner is yet to conclude her
                       submission.

                         List this matter on 8th February, 2024 for
                       further hearing."


                   Today it has been submitted by Ms. Sengupta, learned

             advocate representing the University that one Professor, Mr.

             Debasish Mondal was appointed on 01.02.2024 as a

             temporary Dean of the Faculty Council for Post-Graduate

             studies in Arts and Commerce.

                   In the midst of the final arguments of this case
                                2




involving interpretation of the relevant rules, the University

has ventured to appoint the said Professor. It is true that

there was no stay order from this Court.

         The relevant rule for appointment of a temporary Dean

is quoted below:

                     "(9) The Vice-Chancellor shall, in the event
                of any temporary vacancy of the office of Dean,
                select a seniormost Professor of that University
                according to the date of their joining in the
                same University for a period not more than six
                months:

                     Provided that such selection of Dean on
                temporary vacancy shall be communicated
                forthwith to the State Government for the
                purpose of re-constitution of Selection
                Committee."


         In my, prima facie, view to appoint a temporary Dean,

seniority has to be reckoned from the date when a teacher

becomes Professor.

         The appointment of Mr. Debashis Mondal appears to

be in violation of the rule as quoted above. The petitioner is

senior to him. Accordingly, the appointment of Mr. Debasish

Mondal as the Dean is stayed for a period of ten days from

this date.

         Let Mr. Debasish Mondal be added as a respondent in

this writ petition.

Liberty is granted to the petitioner to correct the cause title.

The petitioner is directed to serve a copy of the writ petition upon the added respondent intimating that this matter will appear on 01.03.2024 at 2 p.m. under the same 3 heading.

This Court does not entertain the prayer of the university to file any further affidavit in this matter since it is the view of the Court that this writ petition can be decided on the basis of the report filed by the university in the form of an affidavit.

Mr. Sengupta, learned advocate, prays for stay of the operation of the order.

Such prayer is considered and rejected.

(Kausik Chanda, J.)