S/L 73 23.07.2026 Court No.04 B.K.N M.A.T. 1948 of 2024 Bipad Bhanjan Dey Vs. The State of West Bengal & Ors. Mr. Partha Sarathi Bhattacharyay, Sr. Adv., Mr. Shahan Shah, Mr. Soumen Barman, Mr. Md. Shahjahan, Ms. Sanjita Sarkar … for the Appellant. Ms. Chandreyi Alam, Ld. AGP, Mr. Arhat Biswas, Ms. Kakali Dutta … for the State of West Bengal. 1. Heard the learned senior advocate for the appellant, who was the writ petitioner before the Trial Court. 2. The writ petitioner was engaged for a contractual period of 01.07.2021 to 31.06.2022 as a Block Accounts Manager in the office of the Chief Medical Officer of Health, Rampurhat District and Secretary, District Health and Family Welfare Samity at Rampurhat, District Birbhum. During his contractual engagement some irregularities occurred in disbursement of amounts for various schemes which were found to be highly overpaid. The writ petitioner’s contractual services were thus discontinued since 01.05.2022. 3. The writ petition was filed by the petitioner assailing a much later order dated 07.11.2022 communicated to him whereby and whereunder he was informed that in the 13th minutes of the HR Advisory Committee of 18.10.2022 there was a decision not to allow him to resume his job on contractual basis. He also claimed 2 remuneration for the period which he was kept out claiming that during subsistence of the contract period he could not have been prevented from discharging his contractual duties. The Hon’ble Single Judge found that having regard to the nature of his contractual existence, the writ petitioner could not claim the benefit of any procedural prescription contained in the service rules for conducting departmental proceeding against Government servants. Having regard to the nature of his employment and considering some admissions said to have been made by the writ petitioner by virtue of refund of certain misappropriated amounts, the Writ Court found that no relief could be granted to the writ petitioner. 4. The learned senior advocate appearing for the writ petitioner/appellant submits that the Hon’ble Single Judge has passed the order relying upon the report submitted by the State on the date on which the matter was disposed of by the Trial Court wherein several documents were annexed including an order dated 03.10.2023 purporting to be an order of termination with effect from 01.05.2022. It is his submission that various findings have been recorded in this order to the prejudice of the writ petitioner, without any opportunity to the writ petitioner in this regard. 5. He further submits that since the letter dated 03.10.2023 was part of the instructions submitted in the Court on 3 the date of disposal of the writ proceeding, he was deprived of an opportunity to put the same to challenge. 6. The learned AGP on the other hand submits that a position emerging from the record, which cannot be disputed is the fact that the writ petitioner was kept away from the office and from discharging his duties since May 2022 after discovery of irregularities, which we have already noted above. Issuance of a letter on 03.10.2023 cannot endow the writ petitioner with any claim for resumption of his duties having regard to the nature of his erstwhile contractual existence in the department. No such enforceable claim can be made out by the writ petitioner so as to seek a direction for his resumption of duties, let alone payment of any past remuneration etc. 7. We have considered the rival submissions. 8. The contractual engagement of the writ petitioner is not in dispute. It is also not in dispute that he was not working since May 2022 on grounds of certain enquiry conducted by the department wherein they found certain financial irregularities, which they attributed to the writ petitioner. Insofar, as the conclusion of the Hon’ble Single Judge that in the given facts and circumstances there was no scope for reinstatement of the writ petitioner to his contractual existence, we find no reason to interfere with the order of the Hon’ble Single Judge. 9. However, we find that the letter dated 03.10.2023 casts a stigma on the writ petitioner/appellant and the same is not preceded by any opportunity whatsoever. Under 4 these circumstances, we find that no stigma shall be attached to the writ petitioner by virtue of the letter dated 03.10.2023. 10. The appeal is disposed of accordingly. 11. Urgent certified copy of this order, if applied for, be given to the parties upon compliance of all necessary formalities. (Madhuresh Prasad, J.) (Prasenjit Biswas, J.)