ARATI DASGUPTA Vs. ALOK KUMAR BASU

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The service and retiral benefits of the petitioner who initially moved a writ petition and obtained an order on 20.1.92 in Civil Order No. 13320(W) of 1986, was subsequently reaffirmed in a subsequent writ petition under an order dated 27.6.95 in CO. 10091 (W) of 1994. Both the writ petitions were disposed of by such final orders. In the first order in CO. 13320(W)/86, the respondents were directed to proceed against the petitioner in accordance with law. The petitioner was also directed to be heard and shall be allowed to adduce evidence, thereafter reasoned order shall be passed. The service of the petitioner be not treated as terminated nor shall be treated that she is no longer in service, as referred to paragraph 12 of the affidavit -in -opposition filed therein without any opportunity of hearing. The petitioner shall be paid the service benefits if the same is otherwise admissible within a period of three months from date. Since no step was taken by the authority concerned, the petitioner retired from service by the passage of time, i.e. on 15.3.91. She is entitled to get service benefits as well as retiral benefits including all arrear salaries. The learned counsel appeared on behalf of the State -respondents and submitted that the State has no objection if the relief, as prayed for by the petitioner, is granted to her. Having heard the learned counsel for the petitioner that the termination of service of the petitioner was set aside by the erstwhile writ court, why not the petitioner will be considered as continuing her service till the date of her retirement and will be entitled to get all service benefits, the learned counsel for the State -respondents contended before this court that the Dist. Inspector of Schools (PE) Darjeeling, has already forwarded her case to the Director of School Education, West Bengal, for necessary orders. It was further submitted on behalf of the State -respondents that there is no objection on behalf of the State -respondents in respect of relief sought for by the writ petitioner in this application. The writ petition was accordingly disposed of with a direction upon the Director of Primary School Education, West Bengal, for settling the retiral benefits and arrear salaries of the petitioner within two months from the date of communication of this order after giving the petitioner an opportunity of being heard.

(2.) Consequent upon the order passed by this court, the concerned Dist. Inspector of Schools called upon the Director of School Education to release the appropriate fund for the purpose of payment of arrear salaries to the petitioner. After making several representations the concerned Director of School Education. West Bengal, under Memo No. 100 -Law (Pry) dated 16.1.97 held that she is to be treated in service as per the order of the Hon'ble Court but her pay be notionally fixed upto 31.3.1991 and the retiral benefits as admissible under the rules be paid to her immediately . Being aggrieved by and dissatisfied with such office Memorandum a contempt application was made before this court when a rule was issued by the appropriate Bench of this court. Even after the issuance of Rule the alleged contemner had personally been present in court and asked for dispensation of his further appearance and he assured that he would take necessary steps for compliance of the court order.

(3.) Since the learned Judge who had taken the matter had retired, the matter was directed to appear in the list as per the determination as fixed. At the time of hearing of the contempt application, the learned counsels for the parties wanted to file their affidavits, supplementary affidavit and also rejoinder in connection thereto.