Calcutta High Court (Appellete Side)
Pg (Nityananda Ghosh vs State Of West Bengal Ors.) on 14 May, 2015
Author: Dipankar Datta
Bench: Dipankar Datta
05 14.05.2015 W.P.5000(W) of 2002
pg (Nityananda Ghosh vs. State of West Bengal Ors.)
Mr. Sadhan Kr. Halder..........for the petitioner
Mr. Anami Sikder
Mr. Animesh Bhattacharya......for the respondent no. 6
Vakalatnama filed by Mr. Animesh Bhattacharya, learned advocate for the respondent no.6 shall be retained with the records.
The file has been placed before this Bench for reconstruction of the writ petition, which is not traceable in the department. Department shall be at liberty to reconstruct the writ file based on the documents that have been made available by Mr. Bhattacharya.
Having heard learned advocates for the parties, this Bench is inclined to dispose of the writ petition without even waiting for reconstruction as directed above.
It has been ascertained from Mr. Halder, learned advocate for the petitioner that the petitioner has not been contacting him since filing of the writ petition. He also submits that the orders passed on this writ petition are not available with him.
According to Mr. Sikder, learned advocate leading Mr. Bhattacharya, the petitioner has obtained employment elsewhere and may not be interested in pursuing the writ petition. He, however, submits that owing to pendency of the writ petition, approval of appointment of the respondent no.6 has been accorded with the condition that the same shall abide by its result as a consequence whereof the respondent no.6 is not getting incremental benefits.
Since the petitioner seems to be disinterested in pressing this writ petition, the same stands disposed of with the observation that the District Inspector of Schools (S.E.), Nadia shall either delete the aforesaid condition in the approval memo dated May 14, 2002 or issue a fresh approval memo in favour of the respondent no.6 as early as possible but not later than a fortnight from date of receipt of a copy of this order.
The district inspector shall further examine the question as to whether the petitioner is entitled to any financial benefit or not, which has not been paid to him, and if the answer is in the affirmative, he shall proceed to compute and release the same as early as possible but not later than six weeks from date of receipt of a copy of this order.
There shall be no order as to costs.
Urgent photostat certified copy of this order, if applied for, be furnished to the parties expeditiously.
(DIPANKAR DATTA, J.)