Calcutta High Court (Appellete Side)
Pramatha Nath Das vs The State Of West Bengal & Ors on 25 September, 2013
Author: Debasish Kargupta
Bench: Debasish Kargupta
1
25.09.2013.
srm
W.P. No. 6175 (W) of 2013
Pramatha Nath Das
Versus
The State of West Bengal & Ors.
Mr. Raghunath Das
... For the Petitioner.
Mr. Bimal Chatterjee, learned Advocate General
Mr. D.S. Mishra
... For the State.
It is submitted on behalf of the petitioner that he is not getting the
remuneration during the pendency of this writ application. Therefore, the
interim orders already passed in the above writ application is required to be
modified for releasing the remuneration.
It is submitted by learned Advocate General, appearing on behalf of
the State respondents, that there is no bar and/or impediment in releasing the
remuneration of the petitioner for the service of the petitioner as Guest Teacher till 31st March, 2012 in terms of the Government Order No. 674‐ SE(S)/3S‐38/07, dated May 30, 2008 and from April 01, 2012 in terms of the Order passed under Memorandum No. 3269‐SE (S)/3S‐25/2009, dated October 16, 2012 read with Government Order No. 957‐SE(S)/10M‐25/2009, dated May 2 22, 2012 without prejudice to the rights and contentions of the parties in these proceedings.
In view of the above, the interim order passed in the above writ application is modified to the effect that the remuneration of the petitioner for rendering service as Guest Teacher shall be released for the period up to March 31, 2012 in terms of the Government Order No. 674‐SE(S)/3S‐38/07, dated May 30, 2008 and from April 01, 2012 in terms of the Order issued under Memo No. 3269‐SE (S)/3S‐25/2009, dated October 16, 2012 read with Government Order No. 957‐SE(S)/10M‐25/2009, dated May 22, 2012 without prejudice to the rights and contentions of the parties to this writ proceeding. The up to date remuneration of the petitioner shall be released in terms of the above directions within October 07, 2013.
It is also made clear that if any amount has already been paid to the writ petitioner in excess of the provisions of the above orders the petitioner shall retain the same subject to the result of this case.
( Debasish Kar Gupta, J. )