SUBRAT MUKHERJEE Vs. KAKALI SENSHARMA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) We had heard these intra-court writ appeals and the applications filed therein on 5th March, 2019 and decided the same finally by dictating an order in open court. However, when the order was placed for our signature, it was found that the learned Judge of the writ court had allowed a relief which was not claimed in the writ petition by the first respondent/writ petitioner (hereafter the writ petitioner ) and that we had concurred with the learned Judge without our notice being drawn to such fact by the appellants. In view thereof, the appeals were listed once again. Upon notice to the parties, the unsigned order dated 5th March, 2019 was recalled. The appeals were heard afresh on the limited point as to whether the learned Judge was justified in granting a relief that was not even claimed by the writ petitioner. The parties cited several decisions for and against the point. Having regard to the same, we considered it necessary and accordingly, reserved the judgment in the appeals.

(2.) By a judgment and order dated 14th February, 2018, W.P. 1020 (W) of 2015 presented by the writ petitioner was allowed. The order impugned in the writ petition dated 4th December, 2014 terminating the service of the writ petitioner was set aside by the learned Judge on the ground that she was denied reasonable and adequate opportunity to defend herself against the allegations levelled against her. It was further directed that the writ petitioner shall be deemed to continue in service from the date of such termination till date of the judgment. The contesting respondents in the writ petition, i.e., the employer of the writ petitioner, were granted liberty to frame charges against her and to conduct an enquiry in accordance with law. The writ petitioner was held entitled to monthly remuneration from the date of termination of her service till conclusion of enquiry in terms of the liberty that was granted; however, she was held not entitled to join service until completion of enquiry. It was also held that the writ petitioner would be entitled to interest @ 6% (simple) on her entitlements from the date of termination till date of the judgment.

(3.) M.A.T. 342 of 2018, directed against the said judgment and order dated 14th February, 2018, is at the instance of Dr. Subrat Mukherjee, being the respondent no. 2 in the writ petition. C.A.N. 2558 of 2018 is an application for stay filed in such appeal.