Calcutta High Court (Appellete Side)
Union Of India & Others vs Bankim Chandra Debnath on 29 March, 2019
Author: Bibek Chaudhuri
Bench: Dipankar Datta, Bibek Chaudhuri
IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
APPELLATE SIDE
The Hon'ble JUSTICE DIPANKAR DATTA
And
The Hon'ble JUSTICE BIBEK CHAUDHURI
C.A.N 6600 OF 2017
IN
M.A.T No. 1027 of 2017
UNION OF INDIA & OTHERS
-Versus-
BANKIM CHANDRA DEBNATH
For the Appellants: Mr. Dibyendra Narayan Ray,
Mr. Arpa Chakraborty.
For the Respondent: Mr. Anant Kumar Shaw
Heard on: January 29, 2019.
Judgment on: March 29, 2019.
BIBEK CHAUDHURI, J. : -
1. The Union of India and officers of the Central Reserve Police Force
(hereafter the CRPF) have filed the instant writ appeal challenging the
judgment and order dated 30th January, 2017 passed by the learned
Judge in WP No.17873(W) of 2011.
2. The above mentioned writ petition was filed by one Bankim
Chandra Debnath, the respondent herein, alleging, inter alia, that he was
appointed in the CRPF in 2001. During the period between 2nd March,
2007 and 9th September, 2008, the petitioner was referred to composite
Hospital, CRPF, Guwahati on several occasions on the alleged ground of
his abnormal behaviour. Subsequently on 22nd and 23rd June, 2009, a
proceeding of departmental Rehabilitation Board was held at Eastern
2
Sector Headquarters, Calcutta under the Chairmanship of Inspector
General of Police, Bihar Sector, CRPF, Patna to assess medical fitness of
the respondent. The Medical Board found the petitioner unfit for service
in the CRPF and recommended for his invalidation from service. The
Commandant, IInd Battalion, CRPF, appellant No.6 sent a letter to the
respondent on 20th July, 2009 communicating the observation of the
Medical Board and further informing him that he would be invalidated out
from service after 30 days from the date of issuance, and to submit his
willingness/unwillingness regarding the proposed action within 30 days
from the date of receipt thereof. The respondent initially expressed his
unwillingness by a letter dated 2nd August, 2009. Again on 16th
September, 2009, appellant No.6 informed the respondent in writing that
his disability was assessed to the extent of 100% and he was unfit for
further service in the CRPF and as per provisions contained in Rule 38 of
the CCS (Pension) Rules, 1972, he would be invalidated out from service
after 30 days from the date of such letter. The aforesaid letter was
followed by another letter dated 22nd September, 2009 issued by appellant
No.6 requesting the respondent to submit necessary documents for the
grant of invalid pension. At this stage, the respondent expressed his
willingness subject to the condition that he be favoured with invalid
pension. He was, accordingly, invalidated out from service with effect from
15th October, 2009. On 23rd February, 2010, the appellant No.2 issued a
letter to the respondent informing, inter alia, that he was only entitled to
death/retirement gratuity and medical allowance at the rate of Rs.100 per
month and he would not be favoured with invalid pension as he did not
render qualifying period of service of 10 years. The respondent submitted
a representation on 30th March 2010 requesting the appellant No.6 to
grant invalid pension in his favour which, however, yielded no result.
Subsequently, the wife of the respondent submitted an application for
compassionate appointment in the CRPF in place of the respondent which
was also turned down. Further representations of the respondent did not
3
also find favour of the relevant authority. As a last resort, the respondent
invoked the jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for
appropriate relief in the form of granting invalid pension.
3. The learned Single Judge allowed the writ petition by directing the
appellants to grant full pension to the petitioner before his Lordship's, as
available on invalidation from service with effect from 15th October, 2009
with all arrears within three months from communication of the order.
4. The aforesaid order is assailed in the instant appeal.
5. Mr. D.N. Roy, learned Advocate for the appellants at the outset
draws our attention to the relevant portion of the impugned judgment
which runs thus:-
"Pension on retirement after rendering qualifying service but
before the regular retirement age is provided in Rule 48 the
CCS (Pension) Rules, 1972. Here the employee applies for
retirement and pension after putting in the minimum period
of service, required. It appears from their stand that to avail
of it, in CRPF, an employee must have rendered at least ten
years of qualifying service. When the petitioner
superannuated, then the applicable Rule was 38. Rule 38 is
applicable in extraordinary cases where an employee while in
service becomes totally incapacitated. He is allowed or often
forced to superannuate with pension. Mr. Shaw, for the
petitioner contends that when the circumstances of
superannuation are extraordinary as above, then the
employee is not required to render the minimum period of
qualifying service. In my opinion, the contention of the
petitioner is absolutely correct. It would be plainly illogical if
on an interpretation of the rules, an employee becoming
4
100% incapacitated within 10 years of service would not get
any pension but if such incapacity arose after completion of
10 years of service pension would be granted. The purpose of
rule 38 is beneficent-to grant pension to an employee on the
happening of a serious disability, rendering him totally unfit
for service. Therefore, the emphasis is on disability and not
on the length of the service. In my opinion, the use of the
phrases therein "he may be granted invalid pension" or
"service gratuity in accordance with Rule 49, depending upon
the length of his qualifying service on the date of retirement"
are disjunctive. The reference to Rule 49 or qualifying services
provided therein is only in relation to gratuity. On the
contrary Rule 48 applies in case of pension on voluntary
retirement after rendering qualifying service in, normal
circumstances, where the length of service is material in
granting pension to a person on superannuation. Therefore,
the condition of qualifying service does not apply in case of a
pension on the ground of invalidation of service."
6. It is urged by Mr. Roy that the learned Single Judge failed to
consider that a member of the CRPF is not entitled to any pension unless
he completes qualifying service of 10 years. In order to substantiate his
contention, learned counsel for the appellants refers to Rules 35, 36, 39
and 40 of the Central Civil Services (Pension) Rules, 1972 (hereafter as
the 'said Rules').
7. Rule 35 speaks about superannuation pension which shall be
granted to a Government servant who is retired on his attaining the age of
compulsory retirement.
8. Rule 36 says about the retiring pension which shall be granted -
5
a) To a government servant who retires, or is retired, in
advance of the age of compulsory retirement in accordance
with the provisions of Rule 48 or Rule 48A of these rules,
or rule 56 of the Fundamental Rules or Article 459 of the
Civil Service Regulations; and
b) To a Government servant who, on being declared surplus,
opts for voluntary retirement in accordance with the
provisions of Rule 29 of these rules.
c) To a Government servant who, on being declared surplus
of voluntary retirement in accordance with the provision of
Rule 29 of this Rules.
9. Rule 39 deals with the compensation pension which is payable to a
Government servant on abolition of his permanent post subject to certain
circumstances which are not relevant for the purpose of this case.
10. Rule 40 speaks about compulsory retirement pension of a Central
Government Employee.
11. It is submitted by the learned Advocate for the appellants that Rule
38 of the said Rules cannot be construed as in the nature of beneficial
legislation and thereby giving effect to invalid pension to an employee who
has been invalidated out from his service due to his illness before
completing service of ten years. In other words, an employee must have
completed ten years qualifying service in order to be eligible for invalid
pension. In support of his contention, learned counsel for the appellants
relies upon a judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Union of India
and Another vs. Bashirbhai R. Khiliji, reported in (2007) 6 SCC 16.
12. Paragraph 10 of Bashirbhai (Supra) is relevant for our purpose:-
"Therefore, the minimum qualifying service which is required
for the pension as mentioned in Rule 49, is ten years. The
6
qualifying service has been explained in various memos
issued by the Government of India from time to time. But
Rule 49 read with Rule 38 makes it clear that qualifying
service of pension ten years and therefore, gratuity is
determined after completion of qualifying service of ten years.
Therefore, for grant of any kind of pension one has to put in
the minimum of ten years of qualifying service. The
respondent in the present case, does not have the minimum
qualifying service. Therefore, the authorities declined to grant
him the invalid pension.***"
13. Based on the aforesaid contentions, appellate intervention for
rectification of the impugned order is prayed for by Mr. Roy.
14. Mr. Anant Kumar Shaw, learned Advocate for the respondent
submits that invalid pension under Rule 38 of the said rules may be
granted if a government servant retires from service on account of any
bodily, mental infirmity which permanently incapacitates him for service.
Invalid pension is a separate category of pension having no connection
with other category of pension mentioned in CCS (Pension Rules) 1982.
According to Mr. Shaw, the grant of invalid pension is not dependant
upon rendering of minimum ten years qualifying service by an incumbent.
15. Mr. Shaw next draws out attention to a letter (Annexure P-6 of the
writ petition) dated 22nd September, 2009 addressed to the respondent by
the Commandant, IInd Battalion, CRPF informing him the decision of the
relevant authority to provide him with invalid pension. The respondent
was also directed to submit necessary documents for issuance of such
invalid pension in his favour. Relying on such assurance, the respondent
offered his willingness to be invalidated out from service. Subsequently,
the relevant authority cannot change its stand holding that the
7
respondent was not entitled to invalid pension on the ground that he did
not render ten years qualifying service.
16. Mr. Shaw has, accordingly, prayed for dismissal of the appeal.
17. Factual aspects are not in dispute in the instant case.
1. Undisputedly, the petitioner was appointed in the CRPF in 2001
in the post of Constable (GD).
2. It is also not disputed that after his selection and before his
appointment, he went through medical examination conducted
by the relevant authority engaged by the appellants.
3. The respondent did not dispute the finding of the departmental
Rehabilitation Board held on 22nd and 23rd June, 2009 at
Eastern Sector Headquarter, Calcutta under the Chairmanship
of IGP, Bihar Sector, CRPF, Patna (Bihar). Brief note of
incident/case summaries runs thus:-
"He is suffering from 'Bipolar Disorder' since 1994. While
posted in 11 Bn he was referred to CH Guwahaty on
10.3.07 for his abnormal behavior since 2/3/07 with
symptoms of Manda. One the way to hospital, he
absconded from the Barpeta Road Rly. Station and
reached his native place in W.B. He was taken to
Psychiatry OPD of North Bengal Medical College, Siliguri
on 6.3.07 and treated with parenteral, oral antipsychotics
and lithium. He was further brought back to CH
Guwahaty by his elder brother and admitted there from
10.3.07 to 28.3.07. He was sent on 60 days medical test.
Wef. 29.5.07. On reporting back in the hospital, he was
treated with oral mood stabilizers and Benzodiazepines. He
was discharged on 1.6.07 with category S-3(T-12) without
firearms. He was again referred to CH Guwahaty on 6.2.08
8
with the history of frequent panicky and refused to obey
the orders/instruction. He was discharged on 13.2.08 and
categorized as S2(T-24) without firearms. He was further
referred to CH Guwathaty on 12.7.08 with the history of
excessive talk, restlessness and sleeplessness and
aggressive. After treatment he was sent on 10 days leave
on medical grounds on 29.7.08. He was again referred to
CH Guwahaty on 9.9.08 with the history of abnormal
behavior.
The referral letter of Medical Officer and behavior report
of Coy Commander revealed that he had suspicious
activities. He tends to quarrel unnecessary with coy.
Personnel and civilians outside the camp and also
threatens coy. personnel. He was recommended unfit for
field duties in CRPF as it is very difficult to keep him in the
field unit. He is suffering from 'Bipolar disorder' which is
characterized by episodic spells of MANIA and
DIPRESSION with (or) without PSYCHOTIC FEATURES
and remission and relapses even with medication. He is
unfit for service in CRPF and categorized as S-5. He is
recommended for invalidation from the service and the
percentage of disability is 100%."
18. The Supreme Court in Bashirbhai R. Khiliji (supra) did not have the
occasion to consider the question as to whether an employee governed
under the CCS (Pension) Rules is entitled to extraordinary pension or not
in case of disablement which is attributable to government service in
terms of Rule 3A(1)(a)(i) of the Central Civil Services (Extraordinary
Pension) Rules, 1978. Schedule 1A details out list and classification of
disease which can be contracted during service. Schedule 1A reads thus:-
9
I. LIST AND CLASSIFICATION OF DISEASES WHICH CAN
BE CONTRACTED BY SERVICE
A. Diseases affected by climate conditions
......
B. Diseases affected by stress and strain
i) Psychosis and Psychoneurosis.
ii) Hyperpiesia.
iii) Hypertension (BP).
iv) Pulmonary Tuberculosis.
v) Pulmonary Tuberculosis with pleural effusion.
vi) Tuberculosis - Non-pulmonary.
vii) Mitral Stenosis.
viii) Pericarditis and adherent pericardium.
ix) Endo-carditis.
x) Sub-acute bacterialendo-carditis, including
ineffective endocarditis.
xi) Nyocarditis - acute or chronic.
xii) Valvular disease.
PSYCHOSIS
Psychosis is a common and functionally disruptive symptom
of many psychiatric, neurodevelopmental, neurologic, and
medical conditions and an important target of evaluation and
treatment in neuropsychiatric practice. Psychosis is the
defining feature of schizophrenia spectrum disorders, a
common but variable feature of mood and substance use
disorders, and a relatively common feature of many
developmental, acquired, and degenerative neurologic and
medical conditions. Across these conditions, psychosis is
both a contributor to disability and a barrier to productivity
and participation.
In their current conceptualization of psychosis, both the
APA and the World Health Organization define psychosis
narrowly by requiring the presence of hallucinations (without
insight into their pathologic nature), delusions, or both
hallucinations without insight and delusions. In both of these
10
current diagnostic classification systems, impaired reality
testing remains central conceptually to psychosis.
Delusions (i.e. fixed false beliefs), by definition, are evidence
of impaired reality testing: delusional beliefs are ones
maintained steadfastly even in the face of evidence
contradicting them incontrovertibly.
Similarly, hallucinations (i.e. perceptions occurring in the
absence of corresponding external or somatic stimuli) are
evidence of impaired reality when the individual experiencing
them is unable to recognize the hallucinatory nature of such
experiences.
Both the current APA and the World Health
Organization classification systems acknowledge that "formal
thought disorder" (i.e. disorganized thinking, including
illogicality, tangentiality, perseveration, neologism, thought
blocking, derailment, or some combination of these
disturbances of thought) is one of several commonly co-
occurring features of psychotic disorders. The DSM-5 allows
formal thought disorder to supplant hallucinations and
delusions in the diagnosis of a psychotic disorder when it is
accompanied by grossly disorganized behaviour, catatonia (for
schizophrenia, schizophreniform, brief psychotic, and
schizoaffective disorders) and/or negative symptoms (for
schizophrenia, schizophreniform, and schizoaffective
disorders but not brief psychotic disorder), alone or in
combination. Since mildly disorganized speech is common
and diagnostically nonspecific, the degree of thought disorder
required to fulfil this DSM-5 criterion must be of severity
sufficient to substantially impair effective communication.
A subset of the population with genetic, epigenetic, and
developmental risk factors may, with sufficient exposure to
risk-modifying social and environmental factors, be prone to
developing persistent psychotic symptoms. This psychosis
proneness-persistence model may explain, at least in part,
the development of hallucinations and delusions across the
broad range of psychiatric disorders with which they are
associated. It also may yield insights into the risk factors for
and mechanisms of psychosis associated with neurologic
conditions. Thus psychosis is listed as a feature of multiple
psychiatric disorders presented in the DSM-5. Although
psychosis is the defining feature of the schizophrenia
spectrum disorders (ie, schizophrenia, schizoaffective
disorder, delusional disorder, schizophreniform disorder, and
brief psychotic disorder), it also occurs in some people with
11
bipolar disorder during either a manic or depressive episode
as well as in some individuals during a major depressive
episode associated with major depressive disorder. In those
conditions, the psychotic symptoms (usually delusions) may
be thematically either congruent or incongruent with the
prevailing mood. Psychotic symptoms (ie, hallucinations
without insight, delusions) may develop during either
intoxication or withdrawal from substances and, in some
cases, may become chronic sequelae of prior substance use
(substance-induced psychotic disorder). When individuals
with obsessive-compulsive disorder lack insight into the
pathologic nature of their obsessions, their obsessions are
described as delusions. The psychosis proneness-persistence
model and RDoC approach suggests that the presence of
hallucinations or delusions reflects disturbances in the
neural systems underlying these symptoms regardless of the
categorical psychiatric or neurologic disorder with which they
are associated. {Arciniegas DB. Psychosis. Continuum
(MinneapMinn). 2015;21(3 Behavioral Neurology and
Neuropsychiatry):715-36.}
NEUROSIS
Neurosis is a class of functional mental disorders involving
chronic distress but neither delusions nor hallucinations. The
term is no longer used by the professional psychiatric
community in the United States, having been eliminated from
the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders in
1980 with the publication of DSM III. It is still used in
the ICD-10 Chapter V F40-48.
MOOD DISORDERS
Mood can be defined as a pervasive and sustained emotion or
feeling tone that influences a person's behavior and colors his
or her perception of being in the world. Disorders of
moodsometimes called affective disorders-make up an
important category of psychiatric illness consisting of
depressive disorder, bipolar disorder, and other disorders...
It is tempting to consider disorders of mood on a continuum
with normal variations in mood. Patients with mood
disorders, however, often report an ineffable, but distinct,
quality to their pathological state. The concept of a
continuum, therefore, may represent the clinician's
overidentification with the pathology, thus possibly distorting
his or her approach to patients with mood disorder. Patients
with only major depressive episodes are said to have
12
major depressive disorder or unipolar depression. Patients
with both manic and depressive episodes or patients with
manic episodes alone are said to have bipolar disorder. The
terms "unipolar mania" and "pure mania" are sometimes used
for patients who are bipolar but who do not have depressive
episodes. Three additional categories of mood disorders are
hypomania, cyclothymia, and dysthymia. Hypomania is an
episode of manic symptoms that does not meet the criteria for
manic episode. Cyclothymia and dysthymia are disorders that
represent less severe forms of bipolar disorder and major
depression, respectively {Kaplan and Sadock - Synopsis of
Psychiatry}
Depression
A major depressive disorder occurs without a history of a
manic, mixed, or hypomanic episode. A major depressive
episode must last at least 2 weeks, and typically a person
with a diagnosis of a major depressive episode also
experiences at least four symptoms from a list that includes
changes in appetite and weight, changes in sleep and activity,
lack of energy, feelings of guilt, problems thinking and
making decisions, and recurring thoughts of death or suicide.
Mania
A manic episode is a distinct period of an abnormally and
persistently elevated, expansive, or irritable mood lasting for
at least 1 week or less if a patient must be hospitalized. A
hypomanic episode lasts at least 4 days and is similar to a
manic episode except that it is not sufficiently severe to cause
impairment in social or occupational functioning, and no
psychotic features are present. Both mania and hypomania
are associated with inflated self-esteem, a decreased need for
sleep, distractibility, great physical and mental activity, and
overinvolvement in pleasurable behavior. Bipolar I disorder is
defined as having a clinical course of one or more manic
episodes and, sometimes, major depressive episodes. A mixed
episode is a period of at least 1 week in which both a manic
episode and a major depressive episode occur almost daily. A
variant of bipolar disorder characterized by episodes of major
depression and hypomania rather than mania is known as
bipolar II disorder.
Mood disorders are characterized by a disturbance in the
regulation of mood, behavior, and affect. Mood disorders are
subdivided into
13
(1) depressive disorders
(2) bipolar disorders - Major depressive disorder (MDD) is
differentiated from bipolar disorder by the absence of a
manic or hypomanic episode.
(3) depression in association with medical illness or alcohol
and substance abuse. {Harrison's Principles of Internal
Medicine , 19thed}
19. From the extract of board proceeding which has been reproduced
hereinabove, it is ascertained that the medical board found that the
respondent is suffering from Bipolar Disorder which is characterized by
episodic spells of Mania and Depression with or without Psychotic
Features and relapses even with medication.
20. It is found that the medical board did not arrive at a conclusive
opinion as to whether the respondent was suffering from Bipolar Disorder
without Psychotic Features. If a patient suffers from Bipolar disorder
without Psychotic Features, the cause of the disease lies in his genetic
disorder.
21. In the instant case, it is found from the board report that the
respondent's Bipolar Disorder is associated with Psychotic Features. The
respondent was a Constable of the CRPF. Psychotic Bipolar Disorder,
which respondent was stated to be suffering, could not be detected on
medical examination prior to his entry in service. Had he been suffering
from Bipolar Disorder even before his joining service, it ought to have
been obligatorily recorded by the Medical Board, failing whereof, the
respondent would be entitled to benefit of statutory inference that the said
disease had been contracted during the course of his service. There is no
reason forthcoming in the proceedings of the Medical Board, as to why his
disabilities, eventually stated to be constitutional or genetic in nature,
had escaped the notice of the authorities concerned at the time of his
induction as a constable of the CRPF. In support of our observation, we
14
may profitably rely upon the decision of the Supreme Court in Union of
India & others vs. Manjeet Singh reported in AIR 2015 SC 2114.
22. Rule 3-A(1)(a)(i) of the Central Civil Services (Extraordinary Pension)
Rules provides that disablement shall be accepted as due to government
service, provided that it is certified that it is due to wound, injury or
disease which is attributable to government service. We have already
found, adopting the benefit of statutory inference, that the respondent
had contracted Bipolar Disorder during his service. It is not disputed that
before being diagnosed with Bipolar Disorder, the respondent was posted
as a constable in the Indo-Bangladesh Border. Working in a border area
as a constable is undoubtedly a job having tremendous stress and strain.
It can reasmably be inferred that the respondent was affected with Bipolar
Disorder which is characterized as a species of Psychosis and
Psychoneurosis as a result of stress and strain attributable to government
service.
23. Under the facts and circumstances of the present case, we are of
the considered view that though the respondent is not entitled to invalid
pension in view of the decision of the Supreme Court in Bashirbhai's case
(supra), he is entitled to disability pension because he was affected with
Bipolar Disorder which is a species of Psychosis and Psychoneurosis in
course of his service which rendered him disabled from continuing with
his employment.
24. A question may naturally arise at this juncture as to whether this
court while deciding a mandamus appeal can grant some relief to the writ
petitioner/respondent which was not even sought for by him in his
original application under Article 226 of the Constitution. In UP State
Brassware Corporation Ltd vs. Uday Narain Pandey reported in J.T
2005 (10) SC 344, it was observed by the Supreme Court:-
15
"Order VII, Rule 7 of the Code of Civil Procedure confers
power upon the court to mould relief in a given situation. The
provisions of the Code of Civil Procedure are applicable to the
proceedings under the Industrial Disputes Act. Section 11-A
of the Industrial Disputes Act empowers the Labour Court,
Tribunal and National Tribunal to give appropriate relief in
case of discharge or dismissal of workmen."
25. Similarly, in a writ proceeding, a relief which was not even prayed
for by the writ petitioner can be granted, according to the demand of the
situation. Borrowing the principle of Order VII, Rule 7 of the Code of Civil
Procedure, court can mould relief for doing substantial justice.
26. The Supreme Court in Manjeet Singh (supra) observed:-
"The last in the line of the rulings qua the dissensus has been
pronounced in a batch of Civil Appeals led by Civil Appeal
No.2904 of 2011; Union of India & Others vs. Rajbir Singh in
which this Court on an exhaustive and insightful exposition
of the aforementioned statutory provisions had observed with
reference as well to the enunciations in Dharamvir Singh vs.
Union of India 2013(7) SCC 316, that the provision for
payment of disability pension is a beneficial one and ought to
be interpreted liberally so as to benefit those who have been
boarded out from service, even if they have not completed
their tenure."
27. The respondent joined the CRPF in 2001. He served the force till
15th October, 2009. Before the respondent was invalidated out, he was
directed by the appellant No.6 to submit papers for grant of invalid
pension. Subsequently on 23rd February, 2010, the appellant No.2
informed him in writing that he was not entitled to invalid pension as he
16
did not render qualifying period of service of ten years. The appellants
vehemently urged that the respondent is not entitled to invalid pension as
he was invalidated out before completion of ten years of qualifying service
of ten years. The appellants relied on Bashirbhai's case (supra) in support
of their contention.
28. While this court is of the view that the respondent indeed is not
entitled to invalid pension, it has arrived at the conclusion that the writ
petitioner is entitled to disability pension.
29. In view of such finding made by this court, the appellants are
directed to take immediate step for assessment and grant of disability
pension to the petitioner.
30. The appellants are also directed to complete the exercise of
assessment of disability pension in favour of the writ petitioner within two
months from the date of this order and communicate the same to the writ
petitioner for initiation of payment of such disability pension.
31. The instant appeal and the connected application are thus disposed
of on contest, however, without costs in the light of the observations made
herein above.
Urgent certified website copies of this judgment, if applied for, be
supplied to the parties subject to compliance with all requisite formalities.
(Bibek Chaudhuri, J.)
Dipankar Datta, J. :
I agree (Dipankar Datta, J.)