18th February, 2025 (D/L No.07) Ct. No.4 (SKB) W.P.S.T. 15 of 2025 Lipika Pal Versus The State of West Bengal and others Ms. Pampa Dey (Dhabal) ….for the petitioner. Mr. Tapan Kumar Mukherjee, ld. AGP, Ms. Sangeeta Roy … for the State. 1. The affidavit of service filed in court today is taken on record. 2. The present writ petitioner has moved the State Administrative Tribunal (in short ‘Tribunal’) being aggrieved by deprivation of her salary from December 20, 2023. 3. It is submitted that the petitioner was visited with a Memorandum dated 06.08.2024 issued by the Deputy Director of Health Service (Administration), West Bengal. As per the memorandum, while the petitioner functioning in her capacity as an A.N.M. at the Dumdama Health Welfare Centre, it was alleged that she has kept a bank pass book, cheque book and cash book of the said Welfare Centre at her residence and in spite of repeated directions of the A.M.O.H., she 2 has not handed over the financial charges to the Chief Health Officer. 4. The petitioner was required to submit her response to such show-cause, which she claims to have submitted on 27.08.2024. 5. Without passing any orders thereupon, it is submitted that the salary of the petitioner was already withheld from December 20, 2023. 6. The Tribunal has rejected the petitioner’s prayer for payment of her salary, illegally withheld w.e.f. December 20, 2023. 7. We find that the Tribunal while rejecting the prayer has recorded an opinion that issuance of a show-cause to an employee for remaining absent and for charges, as noted above, is purely an administrative matter and, therefore, it would not be proper for the Tribunal to interfere with such routine administrative matter. 8. The employer, without any doubt has a prerogative or the discretion to proceed against the employee on the basis of any allegation of misconduct. There is no doubt that it is purely an administrative matter. 9. We, however, find that the petitioner had approached the Tribunal seeking the relief of 3 payment of her salary which had been withheld from the month of December, 2023. 10. We have, thus, called upon the learned State counsel to address us as to whether withholding of salary w.e.f. December 20, 2023, in the absence of any order/punishment; and without passing final order on the subsequent show-cause is sustainable in the eyes of law or not. 11. Learned counsel for the State has submitted that from the Memorandum dated 06.08.2024 it is apparent that the petitioner has been indulging in misconduct and has also been absent. Insofar as the show-cause dated 27.08.2024 submitted by the petitioner, in responses to Memorandum dated 06.08.2024, we leave it to the authorities to take appropriate steps in accordance with law, as the situation may legally warrant. 12. Insofar as the withholding of salary is concerned, we observe that it is obvious from a plain reading of the West Bengal Services (Classification Control and Appeal), Rules, 1971 (hereinafter the ‘Rule 71’) that even withholding of increment is a penalty under Rule 8. Rule 8 also prescribes recovery of pay as well as reduction to a lower stage in the time scale of pay to be a 4 penalty. Rule 10 of the 1971 Rules also prescribes the procedure which is required to be followed for imposing penalties. The 1971 Rules also contains certain special procedure to be followed in certain cases before imposing penalties. From bare reading of the provisions contained in 1971 Rules, it is obvious that any reduction or withholding of pay, or even increment is a penal consequences which can only be imposed after complying with the principles of natural justice inherent in the procedural prescription contained in the 1971 Rules. 13. In the present case, without following any procedure and without complying with the principles of natural justice and fairness, the petitioner’s salary has been withheld since December 20, 2023. It is trite law that an order having penal/civil consequences is to be preceded by compliance with the principles of nature justice and fairness. The withholding of salary, in the present case, therefore, not being preceded by principles of natural justice or without complying with any procedural fairness cannot be allowed to sustain. The withholding of salary, in these circumstances, is arbitrary and, therefore, offends 5 Article 14 of the Constitution of India. We, therefore, direct that the admissible amount of salary of the petitioner be paid from December 20, 2023. Let the arrears be paid within a period of six weeks from date. The month-to-month salary be also paid to the petitioner in accordance with law. 14. The writ petition is, thus, allowed. The order of the State Administrative Tribunal is set aside. (Madhuresh Prasad, J.) (Supratim Bhattacharya, J.)