Item No.13, Court No.2 Form No. J(2) IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA CONSTITUTIONAL WRIT JURISDICTION APPELLATE SIDE Present: The Hon’ble Justice Aniruddha Roy WPA 28163 OF 2024 ------------- Amlan Chakraborty & Ors. Vs. The State of West Bengal & Ors. For the Petitioners : Mr. Samim Ahammed, Adv. Ms. Ambiya Khatun, Adv. Mr. A. Maiti, Adv. For the State/Respondent No.1 : Mr. K. J. Yusuf, Ld. AGP, Mr. Parikshit Goswami, Adv. For the SFDCL : Ms. Parna Roy Choudhury, Adv. Ms. Payel Ghosh, Adv. Heard on : 11.08.2025 Judgment on : 11.08.2025 Aniruddha Roy, J. : Affidavit of service filed in Court today, is taken on record. Mr. Samim Ahammed, Ms. Ms. Ambiya Khatun and Mr. A. Maiti learned Advocates appear for the petitioners. Mr. K. J. Yusuf, learned AGP and Mr. Parikshit Goswami, learned Advocate appear for the respondent no.1/State. Ms. Parna Roy Choudhury, learned Advocate led by Ms. Payel Ghosh, learned Advocate appear for the SFDCL. 2 Facts: 1. The order dated June 16, 2025 has already recorded that the petitioners shall not file any exception to the reports. 2. Pursuant to the direction of this Court, the respondent no.1 has filed its report on affidavit affirmed on March 4, 2025, the same is taken on record. 3. The State Fisheries Development Corporation Limited/respondent no.2 (for short the Corporation) has filed two reports on affidavits both affirmed by one Sarit Bhattacharya on April 2, 2025 and July 3, 2025 respectively. Submissions : 4. The petitioners were engaged as Daily Rated Workers who worked for the Corporation in their respective projects in various places. 5. Replying upon the documents being Annexure-P3 at pages 93 to 96 to the writ petition learned Advocate for the petitioners submits that, the project-in-charges of the respective projects time and again requisitioned for necessary amount and submitted its demand before Managing Director of the Corporation for making necessary payments to the Daily Rated Workers. The primary documents contain the respective enclosures showing the names of the Daily Rated Workers, which include the petitioners. 6. Learned Advocate then relies upon Annexure-P4 at page 153 to the writ petition and submits that the Managing Director of the Corporation had duly informed the Principal Secretary of the Fisheries 3 Department that, to work with various projects of the Corporation it required additional strength of manpower above than the sanctioned post and, accordingly, the Daily Rated Workers were engaged as per the need and requirement from time to time to continue the Pisciculture operations at 21 numbers of projects and operations of Guest Houses and other restaurants. This document is of February 5, 2021. 7. The petitioners being the Daily Rated Workers through this writ petition claim their unpaid wages for the period from September, 2023 to October, 2024. 8. Learned Advocate for the petitioners further submits that, even after the said period being September, 2023 till October, 2024, though the petitioners have worked and have been working but have not been paid till date. 9. Ms. Parna Roy Choudhury, learned Advocate appearing for the Corporation submits that there is no formal engagement of the petitioners. The petitioners were engaged project wise by the respective project-in-charges. Referring to the document from the writ petition at pages 37 to 92 she submits that, the alleged Register of Attendance is not an authenticated document and does not bear the seal and signature of the project-in-charges of the respective projects. Accordingly the attendance of the petitioners are also disputed. 10. Learned Advocate also submits that, the claim of the petitioners are against the Fisheries Corporation and the State has no role to play and even if it is found from the record that any payment is due and 4 payable, the same shall have to be paid by the Fisheries Corporation not from the State Exchequer. 11. Per contra, learned Advocate for the Fisheries Corporation submits that, at present the Corporation has been running in loss and has been asking for financial aid from the State. In this regard she refers to a document at page 153 of the writ petition. Decision : 12. After considering the rival contentions of the parties and upon perusal of the materials on record this Court is of the view that, the engagement of the petitioners cannot be questioned in any way. In support of such finding the documents at pages 93 to 96 from the writ petition can be looked into and relied upon. None of the reports on affidavits files on behalf of the Fisheries Corporation would show that whatever admissible dues for the period between September, 2023 till October, 2024 or thereafter till date has been paid to the Daily Rated Workers, the mere contention of the Fisheries Corporation that, all the petitioners are not working and they left the job has not been sustained on the basis of the materials on record. Even if the Attendance Register as disputed on behalf of the Fisheries Corporation for the sake of argument is accepted, then it is also a fact to be noted that, the Fisheries Corporation has not been able to show the payment of admissible dues to the Daily Rated Workers during the period which they have worked. 13. The Daily Rated Workers since have rendered their service, they must be paid at the agreed rate. 5 14. In view of the above discussions and reasons and keeping equity in mind the respondent no.3 is directed with the assistance of the respective project-in-charges to crystalise the amount admittedly payable to each of the petitioners after verification of all available records and then shall release the payment and pay the amount in favour of the petitioners who shall be found to be otherwise eligible to receive payment admittedly on record since September, 2023 till October, 2024 and thereafter the petitioners who would be found to have worked on record shall be paid accordingly till the date of today’s order. 15. The entire exercise including the making of payments to the petitioners shall positively be carried out and completed by the respondent no.3 within a period of three months from the date of communication of this order. 16. It is made clear that this order shall not create any right or equity in favour of the petitioners in any more save and except to the extent direction of payment is made under this order. 17. With the above observations and directions this writ petition, WPA 28163 of 2024 stands allowed, without any order as to costs. 18. All parties are to act on the server copy of this order duly downloaded from the official website of this Court. (Aniruddha Roy, J.) D. Das, P.A.