Calcutta High Court (Appellete Side)
Professor Sushanta Dattagupta vs Union Of India & Anr on 12 August, 2015
Author: Girish Chandra Gupta
Bench: Girish Chandra Gupta
1 12.08.2015 U/L 1 RP Ct.04 MAT 1218 of 2015 CAN 7947 of 2015 Professor Sushanta Dattagupta vs. Union of India & Anr.
Mr. S. N. Mookherjee, Sr. Adv.
Mr. Kishore Dutta, Sr. Adv.
Mr. Soumya Majumder Ms. Sumita Shaw ...For the Appellant Mr. Kausik Chanda, Ld. Additional Solicitor General Mr. Dibashis Basu ...For U.O.I. The appeal and the connected application are treated as on day's list.
The appeal is directed against an order dated 22nd July, 2015 by which the learned trial Court dismissed the writ petition. The aggrieved writ petitioner has come up in appeal.
After hearing the learned Counsel appearing for the parties, we are of the opinion, that the submission made by Mr. Mookherjee, learned Sr. Advocate appearing for the appellant, pointing out that the allegations contained in paragraphs (c) and (d) of the show cause notice dated 29th June, 2015 are vague, is not without substance.
Mr. Chanda, learned Additional Solicitor General would not also dispute the fact that the particulars of the ten alleged works are required for the purpose of giving an effective reply to the show cause notice. Similarly the directive issued by the Government of India fixing the amount of Rs.75,000/- as the maximum honorarium should also specifically be pointed out. In fairness legible photocopy should also be furnished.
He further submitted that he can submit the particulars and the legible photocopy of the directive within a week from date.
2In that view of the matter, let such particulars and legible photocopy be furnished on or before 20.8.2015. It will be open to the writ petitioner/appellant to give a reply within 21 days from the date of furnishing the particulars and documents as indicated above.
It is clarified that in the event the aforesaid particulars are not supplied within the time stipulated herein the period of 21 days shall commence from the day following the date of supply.
Needless to mention that we have not gone into the merits of the appeal and the same shall be considered on their own merit.
The appeal and the connected application are, thus, disposed of.
Let a plain photocopy of this order, duly counter-signed by the Assistant Registrar (Court), be delivered to the learned Advocates for the parties, upon usual undertaking.
(Girish Chandra Gupta, J. ) (Shib Sadhan Sadhu, J.) 3