High CourtsSingle Bench(2018) 04 CAL CK 0087

MAINAK MOHAN DAS vs THE STATE OF WEST BENGAL & ORS.

Calcutta High Court · Decided on 16 April 2018

HON’BLE JUDGES
ARINDAM SINHA, J
RESULT
Disposed Off
CASE NUMBER
W.P. 4626 (W) of 2018

CourtKutchehry membership

More clarity. Every judgment.

Download court copies, explore connected cases and make more of every research session.

Loading membership options…

CourtKutchehry membership

More clarity. Every judgment.

Download court copies, explore connected cases and make more of every research session.

Loading membership options…

Ask AI about this case

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

Judgment

16 paragraphs · 335 words

Petitioner appears in person and wants to move this writ petition on urgent basis. He files affidavit of service. He submits, he has challenged letter

dated 13th February, 2018 by which he has been released from service with effect from 15th February, 2018. No show cause notice was issued

against him. According to him, the College cannot act in this manner and that is why he seeks interference of Court.

Mr. Debasish Som, Chairman, Governing Body of College of Engineering and Management appears and submits, there is this question regarding

whether the writ petition is maintainable considering that the College is a private college. Without prejudice to that submission he relies on Regulations

and Bye-laws of the College, in particular Chapter - II Clause 2.2(3) which is extracted below:-

 “The appointing authority shall have the power to terminate the services of any permanent employee by 3 months’ notice or on payment of 3

months’ salary in lieu thereof, if, on medical grounds, certified by a medical authority nominated by the Governing body, his retention in services is

considered undesirable by such appointing authority.â€​

His further submission is that there be an adjournment since petitioner’s appeal is being considered by Chairman of the Society. If after the

appeal is disposed of petitioner is still aggrieved, he might press with this writ petition, if found maintainable.

Perusal of impugned letter and the Clause extracted above is sufficient for this Court to direct that the impugned release order will abide by the result

of this writ petition, since, prima facie, the said clause appears not to have been invoked, at least in terms. It is expected that the appeal will be

disposed of by 30th April, 2018 and copy of the report or Memorandum or order in appeal should be made over to petitioner by 2nd May, 2018. That is

necessary since petitioner has received pay upto April, 2018 and thereafter cannot be expected to remain unsure of his entitlement to salary.

List on 7th May, 2018.