Research › Search › Judgment

Calcutta High Court · body

2026 DAILYLAW 30365 (CAL)

THE CHAIRMAN, WEST BENGAL TRANSPORT CORPORATION LTD AND ORS. v. RAMESH SINGH AND ORS.

APO/18/2026 · 2026-07-23

Madhuresh Prasad, Prasenjit Biswas

body2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

OD 2 ORDER SHEET IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Civil Appellate Jurisdiction ORIGINAL SIDE APO/18/2026 IN WPO/810/2025 IA NO: GA/1/2026 THE CHAIRMAN, WEST BENGAL TRANSPORT CORPORATION LTD AND ORS. VS RAMESH SINGH AND ORS. BEFORE: The Hon’ble JUSTICE MADHURESH PRASAD AND The Hon’ble JUSTICE PRASENJIT BISWAS Date: 23rd July, 2026. Appearance: Ms. Deblina Chattaraj, Adv. Ms. Poulami Chattopadhyay, Adv. …for WBTC Mr. Debdutta Basu, Adv. Mr. Soumabha Nandan, Adv. …for respondent no. 1 Ms. Deblina Lahiri, Adv. Mr. Mrinmoy Chatterjee, Adv. …for respondent no. 2 The Court: Heard learned advocate for the appellant. The respondent is the writ petitioner in the writ proceeding which is pending before the Writ Court. The writ petitioner claimed his retiral benefits comprising of Provident Fund, Gratuity, Leave Salary/Leave encashment etc. before the Writ Court. It appears from the order under appeal that the respondents before the Writ Court have taken a stand that the entire amount claimed by the writ petitioner could not be paid as funds were available to discharge only a part of the petitioner’s claim. Under the circumstances, considering the stand of the respondent Corporation the learned Single Judge has held that they are bound to 2 release the retiral dues which cannot be withheld on the ground of paucity of fund. Since some amount was sanctioned, the Writ Court adjourned the matter in the following terms : “9. The matter is made returnable on 4th May, 2026. 10. In the event the balance dues of the petitioner are not cleared prior to the adjourned date, then the salary of the respondent nos. 3, 4 and 5, the Chairman, Managing Director and the Chief Accounts Officer of the West Bengal Transport Corporation shall remain frozen until further order.” Therefore, the entire issue is still pending before the Writ Court. We do not find any infirmity in the order impugned as the appellants are free to raise all issues in the pending writ proceeding. The appeal and the connected application are disposed of accordingly. (MADHURESH PRASAD, J.) (PRASENJIT BISWAS, J.) TR/