GOPAL BENARJEE Vs. STATE OF WEST BENGAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The writ petitioner was appointed as a Memo Writer in the year 1965 by the Respondent No. 4. Thereafter, he got promoted and ultimately he was posted as Samabayika-in-Charge with effect from 1.4.1997. He was also directed to perform the additional duties of the purchase officer from 10.11.97. The petitioner contended that suddenly by an order dated 31.3.1998 the respondent No. 3 directed Dwijen Chatterjee, Supervisor and working in the Accounts Section to take over the charge of Samabayika Section of the respondent No. 4 from the petitioner who was then in-charge of the Samabayika Section, after the annual verification of stock/cash of the Samabayika Section for the year 1997-98. In the said order the petitioner was also directed to make over charge of the Samabayika Section to Dwijen Chatterjee after the annual verification of stock/cash for the year 1997-1998 was over and to continue to work in the Accounts Section until further orders.

(2.) The petitioner stated that on receipt fo the said order dated 31.3.1998 he made over charge of the Samabayika Section on the very same day to Dwijen Chatterjee. Thereafter, on 2.6.1998 he received a communication from respondent No. 3 being Annexure 'E' to the writ petition that on the basis of a report of the Manager of the Society he was suspended from the service of the Society for gross financial irregularities committed by him as Samabayika-in-Charge during the accounting year 1997-98. In the said letter it was also intimated that appropriate action will be taken against him in due course in consultation with the Board of Administrators of the Society. The petitioner being aggrieved by the said suspension order dated 2.6.1998 issued by the respondent No.3 had moved the writ petition.

(3.) It appears from the records that on 30.06.1998 directions were issued to file the affidavit-in-opposition within eight weeks and reply, if any, by two weeks thereafter. The writ petition was directed to come up after 12 weeks for final hearing. An interim order was passed on 30.6.1998 staying the impugned order of suspension of the writ petitioner by the respondent No.3 pending the hearing of the writ petition since there was no approval of the Board of the said Society under Rule 52 (2) (i) of the West Bengal Society Rules, 1987. Gist of the order dated 30.6.1998 alongwith copies of the writ petition were served on the respondents and affidavit of service was filed. Thereafter, no subsequent dates of hearing the respondent No. 4 was represented by their counsel. Though directions have been issued to file the affidavit-in-opposition, no such affidavit has been filed controverting the allegations in the writ petition. There is no represention on behalf of the respondents during the final hearing.