JOSODA MONDAL Vs. STATE OF WEST BENGAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) On 12th Decemebr, 2001 I refused to grant any interim order. The reason, therefore, had been indicated in the order dated 12th Dec., 2001. It is the contention in the writ petition, which has been filed by the Prodhan, that the requisitionists did not serve the requisition upon the Prodhan for the purpose of convening a meeting to consider the motion seeking such removal of the petitioner from the post of Prodhan. The requisitionists, since the Prodhan did not hold the meeting in terms of the requisition proposed to hold the meeting to consider the self same motion. It appeared to me, that either the Prodhan is telling lie or the requisitionists are telling lie and, accordingly, I refused to grant any interim order but at the same time directed the matter to appear as "Listed Motion" once again.

(2.) Service was effected. But when the matter was listed once again none of the requisitionists appeared and accordingly, I had no other option but to hold in favour of the petitioner. Therefore, on 11th Jan., 2002 I passed an order.

(3.) In the vacating application filed subsequently, the requisitionists have disclosed the records which contains an acknowledgement of receipt of the said requisition by the job assistant of the Gram Panchayat in question. It was contended that since the requsition was submitted to the job assistant and not to the Prodhan, this was not a requisition at all.