03.07.2026 Court No.13 Item No.1 pk CPAN 1378 of 2024 The West Bengal Legal Services Employees Association represented by its Secretary Vs. Sri Siddhartha Kanjilal, the Principal Secretary to the Government of West Bengal, Judicial Department and another In FMA 705 of 2022 Mr. Chittapriya Ghosh, Mr. Kuntal Ray, Mr. Priyanka Saha ... For the applicants. Mr. Amitesh Banerjee, Sr. Adv. … for the alleged contemnors. . 1. Affidavit of service filed in Court is taken on record. 2. The alleged contemnor no. 2 has filed an affidavit. The alleged contemnors are also present virtually. 3. The subject matter of the contempt proceeding arises out of an order dated 07.12.2023 passed in FMA 705 of 2022. The subject matter of the appeal concerns regularization of the services of the employees of the District Judgeship and High Court Legal Services Authority. 4. It is an admitted position that the said employees were all engaged on a contractual basis. It is specifically provided in the contract of engagement that their services would not be regularized. 2 5. The first writ petition being WPA 3664 of 2021 was filed by the S.L.S.A. and H.C.L.S.A. employees for permanent absorption in the services of the State and the same was based on the following criteria. The said employees claimed that they functioned as full time employees of the District Judgeship and the High Court Legal Services Authority. They assisted in mediation, carrying confidential files and have keenly assisted in the justice delivery system. Despite whereof, they are being paid a lump sum amount between Rs.10,000/- to Rs. 14,000/- and are all being treated unequally with regular employees of the District Judgeship and the High Court. 6. The said writ petition was disposed of by a Single Bench of this Court on 11.02.2021 directing the Judicial Secretary to take a decision in the matter of regularization of their appointments. Pursuant to the said order the Judicial Secretary passed an order observing that appropriate amendments are required to be introduced in the relevant recruitment rules to permit permanent absorption of the applicants. 7. Upon failure of the State to carry out any such amendment, a second writ petition being WPA 20115 of 2021 was filed by the applicants seeking mandamus on the State, inter alia, to implement the order of the Judicial Secretary mentioned hereinabove and also to frame appropriate Rules for the regularization of the services of the applicants. 3 8. During the pendency of the said writ petition, the Judicial Secretary of the State prepared draft Rules i.e. West Bengal Legal Services Authority Amendment Rules, 2021. The writ petition was disposed of accordingly. 9. On an appeal being carried by the applicants, a coordinate Bench of this Court seeing the plight of the applicants insisted upon the State particularly the Judicial Secretary to indicate as to when such Rules will be formalized and passed by the State Government. A report was filed by the Judicial Department wherefrom it appears that the Finance Department has approved the contractual engagement of employees in the High Court Legal Services Authority without any scope for permanent absorption. 10. It is however, reiterated by the learned counsel for the alleged contemnor no. 2 that the employees were also bound by the terms of contract of their engagement that their contractual service will never be regularized. The legality of such a term unfortunately has not gone into by any Court, authority or forum. 11. Be that as it may, while disposing of the FMA 705 of 2022 in its order dated 07.12.2022 the submissions of the Additional Government Pleader of the State had recorded that the Rules would be 4 finalized and passed by the State within a period of three months. 12. This Court finds several legal and procedural infirmities in the process and procedure adopted in framing of the Rules of 2021 (Supra) and placing the same before the Finance Department. The applicants appear to have been taken for a ride by the Judicial Department of the State. 13. It is now well settled that any matter involving any finance implications on the State first requires a policy decision taken at the Cabinet level. It is at this level that all the stake holders and Departments are taken into confidence and express their views. It is only after clearance of the policy decision from all departments that its implementation is considered. 14. This Court is therefore, not surprised with the affidavit filed by the alleged contemnor no. 2 today that it had never agreed to or concurred with any permanent absorption or regularization of the applicants. It is only after a policy decision is taken it is required to be implemented after assessing all finance and logistic matters. It is only thereafter that a particular Department of a State is permitted to frame Rules for the purpose of regularization of any contractual employee. 15. There is substance in the argument of the learned senior Advocate for the alleged contemnor no. 2 that 5 there are more than two lakhs contractual employees in the State. A decision to regularize the contractual employees of the judicial department would have a cascading effect and give birth to enforceable claims on all the contractual employees of all Departments in the State. This would have serious financial consequences. 16. In the light of the above, the undertaking given by the Additional Government Pleader of the State in Court’s order dated 07.12.2023 without any authority or appropriate affidavit or instructions cannot bind the State. There is in fact no estoppel against the law. 17. This Court is of the view that an order which cannot be enforced in law and has no legal basis cannot be enforced in contempt. 18. For the reasons stated hereinabove, the contempt application being CPAN 1378 of 2024 shall stand disposed of without any order. 19. Before parting with these proceedings this Court has already recorded the grievance of the applicants and their legitimate expectation. The applicants shall be entitled to make a formal application before the Cabinet Secretary to highlight their grievances and seek remedies in accordance with law. 20. Rule, if any, shall stand discharged. 6 21. Personal presence of the alleged contemnors is dispensed with. 22. All parties shall act on a server copy of this order duly downloaded from the official website of this court. (Rajasekhar Mantha, J.) (Partha Sarathi Chatterjee, J.)