AMLAN JYOTI ROYCHOWDHURY Vs. STATE OF WEST BENGAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The present writ petition, though filed by the petitioner, also ventilates grievances of the respondent no. 13. Although not a petitioner, by applying the principles of Order XLI Rule 22 and Order XLI Rule 33 of the Code of Civil Procedure which are applicable in view of the void in the Rules regarding writ petitions in such field, the issues raised by the respondent no. 13 and the action taken against the respondent no. 13 are also being dealt with.

(2.) The petitioner is a Chartered Account and submits that his antecedents are impeccable. For such purpose, the petitioner cites his previous engagement in globally renowned audit firm and other institutes. The petitioner was appointed as a Chief Financial Officer (CFO) with the respondent no. 10-Company. In the present writ petition the petitioner has challenged a purported enquiry report dated May 23, 2017 and an order dated November 29, 2016, indicting the petitioner of financial irregularities while in service of the said Company. It is argued that the petitioner was acting as a professional, although designated as Chief Financial Officer(CFO), since TDS was deducted from his income under Sec. 194J of the Income Tax Act. Hence, the petitioner was a consultant and not a direct employee of the Company.

(3.) It is argued that after the petitioner came in, he detected several gross irregularities in the previous accounts of the Company and took remedial steps which probably drew the ire of several Sec. of the company officials.