Binoy Ghosh vs State Of West Bengal & Ors

Affidavit of service filed in court today be kept with the record.

The petitioner was appointed as a Civic Volunteer under the West Bengal Police Directorate on 13th October 2013. In 2017 a criminal case was registered against the petitioner and several others under various Sections of the Indian Penal Code. The petitioner was placed under suspension. He was however granted anticipatory bail on 25th August 2017.

The criminal case is pending. Mr. Datta learned Senior Counsel appearing for the State submits that charge sheet has already been submitted. The petitioner prays for a direction on the respondent authorities to allow the petitioner to join service pending disposal of the criminal case. Mr. Datta strenuously opposes such prayer.

I have heard learned counsel for the parties.

As has been held by a Division Bench of this court in the case of Sandip Garai -vs- State of West Bengal & Ors. (W.P. S.T. No. 129 of 2016), by its judgement dated 26th August 2016 the court in exercise of its writ jurisdiction cannot step into the shoes of the Executive/Administrative Authority to determine the issue as to whether or not a person can be appointed or allowed to resume service during the pendency of a criminal proceeding against him. It is the employer, who is required to exercise his discretion in a reasonable manner and in the totality of the circumstances to arrive at a decision. The question whether a person should be permitted to resumes service should be left to the employer. Such exercise cannot be undertaken by the court.

The petitioner has made two representations dated 15th December 2017 and 14th June 2018 respectively, requesting the authorities to permit him to rejoin service.

I direct the Superintendent of Police, Purba Burdwan being the respondent no. 2 to take a reasoned decision on the representations of the petitioner in accordance with the applicable Rules/Regulations/Circulars/Notifications, within a period of six weeks from the date of communication of this order after giving an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner. The decision so taken by the respondent no. 2 shall be communicated to the petitioner within a week from the date of the decision.

I have not gone into the merits of the petitioner's case. It will be for the respondent no. 2 to take an informed decision in the matter considering the totality of the circumstances including the nature of the charges.

This order will have no manner of bearing on the criminal case that is pending before the learned lst Additional Judge, Purba Burdwan.

Since I have not invited affidavits, the allegations contained in the writ petition are deemed not to be admitted by the respondents.

W.P. No. 23547 (W) of 2018 is accordingly disposed of.

Urgent photostat certified copy of this order be supplied to the parties, if applied for, as early as possible.