Calcutta High Court
Supriya Mondal vs The State Of West Bengal on 24 August, 2010
Author: Biswanath Somadder
Bench: Biswanath Somadder
WP No. 2079 of 2006
IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA
Constitutional Writ Jurisdiction
ORIGINAL SIDE
SUPRIYA MONDAL
Versus
THE STATE OF WEST BENGAL
For Petitioner : Mr. K. Bhattacharyya with Mr. R. Hossain.
Advocates.
For State-Respondent : Mr. T.K.Banerjee, Advocate.
BEFORE:
The Hon'ble JUSTICE BISWANATH SOMADDER Date : 24th August, 2010.
The Court : Heard the learned counsel appearing for the parties. Upon perusing the instant application it appears that initially an order was passed by another learned Single Bench of this Court on 29th December, 2006. An appeal was preferred therefrom by the Director of School Education, Government of West Bengal, before the Hon'ble Court of Appeal which was pleased to allow the appeal in terms of the following order dated 12th May, 2008:-
" Heard learned counsel for the appellants on the application for condonation of delay. We are satisfied with the explanation given in the application for 2 condonation of delay. Accordingly the delay in filing the appeal is condoned.
This appeal has been filed by the State challenging the order passed by the learned single Judge on 29th of December, 2006. We are informed that the order under appeal has been passed without taking into consideration the judgment of the Division Bench. It has also been submitted that the judgment passed in Writ Petition No. 4107 (W) of 2006 dated 3rd of March 2006 should have been brought to the notice of the Trial Court. In view of the judgment of the Division Bench, it would not be possible to comply with the direction issued by the learned single Judge.
We are of the considered opinion that it is not necessary to pass any order on the merits of the appeal, since the writ petition is still pending before the learned single Judge. However, to avoid further complications, we direct that the writ petition be set down for final hearing in the next month after the Summer vacation. The interim th order dated 29 December, 2006 stands vacated."
Now, the matter comes up for further consideration before this Court.
The judgment of the Division Bench referred to in the aforesaid order dated 12th May, 2008, was an interim order passed in Tulsi Baxi's matter, which ultimately culminated in the final judgment and order rendered by the Division Bench on 1st October, 2008. This judgment is reported in (2008) 4 CHN 789. However, the ratio of the judgment is inapplicable in the facts and circumstances of the instant case. This 3 Bench had the occasion to consider the aforementioned judgment in a recent matter, being W.P. No. 2580(W) of 2010 (Tumpa Roy vs. State of West Bengal & Ors.). The ratio of the decision rendered in Tumpa Roy's case is squarely applicable in the facts and circumstances of the instant case.
For the reasons stated above, this writ petition is disposed of in terms of the directions given by this Court in W.P. No. 2580(W) of 2010 (Tumpa Roy vs. State of West Bengal & Ors.) Urgent photostat certified copy of this order, if applied for, be supplied to the parties subject to compliance with all requisite formalities (BISWANATH SOMADDER, J.) ss