Research › Search › Judgment

Calcutta High Court · body

2025 DAILYLAW 30261 (CAL)

AMARESH SHAW v. STATE OF WEST BENGAL AND ORS.

FMA/1090/2025 · 2025-08-25

Ajay Kumar Gupta, Rajasekhar Mantha

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

25.08.2025. Item No. 11. Court No. 13 ap F.M.A. No. 1090 of 2025 With I.A. No. CAN 1 of 2025 Sri Amaresh Shaw Versus The State of West Bengal & Ors. Mr. Subrata Kumar Basu, Mr. Sounak Sen. …For the appellant. Mr. Sudipto Panda, Ms. Ananya Neogi. … For the State. Mr. Pabitra Charan Bhattacharjee, Mr. Sovan Nayak. …For the respondent nos.4, 5 & 6. Mr. Srijan Nayak, Mrs. Rituparna Moitra, Mr. Partha Sarathi Pal. …For the respondent nos.2 & 3. 1. Affidavit-of-service filed in Court today be taken on record. 2. The instant intra court appeal is directed against an order dated 6th May, 2025 passed by a learned Single Judge of this Court in W.P.A. 5497 of 2023 whereby the learned Single Judge refused to interfere with the termination of service of the petitioner. 3. The records indicate that the writ petitioner was engaged as a staff to the service of Anandanagar Krishi Unnayan Samity Limited (hereinafter referred to as ‘the said Society’) on temporary basis with consolidated pay of Rs.6,000/- per month on 10th October, 2019. His appointment was confirmed in the permanent post of Accountant on 20th April, 2020. By a further communication dated 22nd March, 2022, it 2 was indicated that by resolution No.34/2021 dated 30th April, 2021 passed by the Board of Directors, on completion of one year probationary period, his service was confirmed in all respects. It was further indicated that the appellant would be entitled to Provident Fund, Gratuity and all other financial facilities like any other permanent employee in this Society with effect from May, 2021. 4. Suddenly sometime on 31st August, 2022, the said Society, under the signature of new Secretary, caused an enquiry into the appointment of the petitioner and the report was placed before the Board of Directors. 5. The Board of Directors is stated to have adopted the enquiry report submitted against the petitioner, and vide resolution No.48/2022 dated 12th July, 2022, terminated the service of the petitioner. The enquiry report comprised in six paragraphs. 6. Admittedly, no such report was furnished to the petitioner. This by itself would amount to gross violation of principles of natural justice. 7. This Court secondly notes that the entire rigma- role, conceived of under Section 106 of the West Bengal Co-operative Society Rules, 2011, is required to be followed for the purpose of terminating the service of the petitioner. 8. This Court notices that the appointment of the petitioner was not made suo motu but under the 3 signature of the Secretary of the Board referring to a resolution of the Board of Directors of the Society. 9. Mr. Bhattacharjee, learned Counsel appearing for the respondent nos.4, 5 and 6 submits that the same is contrary to the General Body Meeting held in the year 2022. 10. Be that as it may, since the post in which the petitioner was appointed, is a sanctioned permanent post, after permanent absorption, the Society is required to follow the conditions prescribed under Section 106 of West Bengal Co-operative Society Rules, 2011 for the purpose of ending the service of the appellant. 11. In the aforesaid circumstances, the impugned order of termination of the appellant’s service dated 31st August, 2022 shall stand set aside. The petitioner shall be reinstated forthwith and paid 50% of the wages and salaries that he would have been otherwise entitled to receive. The period of two years during which he remained terminated shall be compensated for the length of service and other service benefits. They shall, however, not be prevented from serving the Society in accordance with law against the petitioner, Secretary of the Society or any person of the Board of Directors, who may have been involved in any illegal process of appointment of the petitioner. 12. With the aforesaid directions, F.M.A. 1090 of 2025 shall stand disposed of. 4 13. In view of disposal of the appeal itself, the connected application being CAN 1 of 2025 shall also stand disposed of. 14. There will be no order as to costs. 15. All parties are directed to act on a server copy of this order duly downloaded from the official website of this Court. (Rajasekhar Mantha, J.) (Ajay Kumar Gupta, J.)