04.08.2026 Court No. 12 Item No.10 GB/Sandip MAT 49 of 2026 With CAN 1 of 2026 The Executive Engineer, Kangsabati Canals, Division – II Vs. The Khatra Peoples’ Cooperative Bank Ltd. & Ors. Mr. Amitava Chaudhuri, Mr. N. Roy …for the Appellant. Mr. Madan Mohan Roy … for the Respondent Nos.1 & 2. Mr. Malay Bhattacharyya, Mr. Subhrajyoti Ghosh … for the Respondent No.5. Ms. Susmita Saha Dutta, Ld. AGP., Mr. Dipjyoti Chakraborty, Mr. Niladri Saha … for the State. 1. In our opinion, the order impugned cannot be sustained. In the absence of affidavits, the learned single Judge could not have arrived at a finding that the appellant was liable to pay the dues of the respondent No. 5. It appears the monthly EMI was deducted by the Executive Engineer/employer from the salary account of the respondent No. 5, as per the agreement. The dues were allegedly accumulated on account of delayed and irregular payments. The society submits that penal interest was chargeable. There are no documents before us which would show that the bank had approached the employer of the loanee/borrower at the relevant time when the loan account was declared NPA, thereby, claiming further deduction on account of accumulated 2 interest. It also appears that only a month before the retirement, a request was made by the cooperative bank, for deduction of an amount of Rs.2,46,858/-. 2. Moreover, we find that Section 59(3) of the West Bengal Cooperative Societies Act, 2006 places the responsibility of making payment on the employer or the drawing and disbursing officer who was liable to deduct the EMI and make payment to the cooperative society, in case of failure to deduct from the salary of the employee, together with interest at the rate of 12% per annum on the sum. The appellant joined the post on February 20, 2023 and all the retirement benefits of the borrower had been released prior thereto. 3. It appears that a report was prepared and filed before the learned Single Judge and the relevant paragraphs therein are quoted below:- “5. A letter was also forwarded vide T.O. Memo. No.647 dated 15.07.25 to the Khatra People's Co-Operative Bank Ltd. requesting the detailed statement of loan repayment status of the concerned employee. The said statement has since been received and collected. 6. Upon scrutiny of the repayment statement provided by the sald bank, it has been found that EMIs have been duly deducted from the salary of Sri Ajit Kumar Bouri and credited to the Khatra People's Co-Operative Bank Ltd. almost on a regular basis from 30.09.2011 to 05.05.2022. While a few Initial EMIs appear to have been deposited by the employee in cash from the year 2009 to 2011 and all subsequent payments were made through this office initially via cheque and thereafter through 3 direct transfer to the bank. It is further revealed that up to the last salary paid prior to retirement, a cumulative total of Rs.7,04,000/- was transferred by this office to the said bank towards repayment of the loan excluding a total cash amount of Rs.31500/- paid to the bank in installments from 2009 to 2011 as reflected in the recovery record of the Khatra People's Co-Operative Bank Ltd. against a loan amount of Rs.3,50,000/- on dated 13.07.2009. 7. That, the Khatra People's Co-Operative Bank stating that they had issued several reminders and recovery letters to the office of the Executive Engineer in the court petition. However, the office sent the Pension papers (single comprehensive form) to the AGWB with no outstanding certificate from the end of employee and accordingly the pension papers were processed and the requisite action could no be taken from the end of the office as well as AGWB. 8. That, while the office acknowledges receipt of certain communications from the bank, the entire outstanding amount was not recovered from the retirement dues of the employee due to internal miscommunication, (the exact cause of which is presently under internal review). The oversight was unintentional and procedural in nature, not willful or malicious. Internal procedures are being reviewed to avoid such occurrences in future.” 4. Under such circumstances, whether the present Executive Engineer can be saddled with the responsibility in terms of Section 59(3) of the said Act as he joined after the retirement of the borrower, is an important question which is required to be answered by 4 the writ court. Secondly, in order to pin point the responsibility upon drawing and disbursing officer of the borrower, the court has to finally come to a conclusion as to which officer was responsible. Thirdly, whether the bank had a genuine claim or not must be also decided. Whether the bank had taken steps to claim such dues and/or informed the borrower about the declaration of account as NPA and consequent accumulation of interest etc. are relevant factors. The calculation of amount was not disclosed in the writ petition. The respondent No. 5 submits that nothing was due and payable and each and every penny had been repaid. There were no outstanding dues. No accounts were even submitted to the respondent No. 5. The borrower’s stand should be on affidavit. He has the best knowledge about the entire transaction. 5. Further, we find that in March 2022, a letter was sent to the Executive Engineer claiming Rs. 2,46,858/- by the cooperative society and the borrower retired on April 30, 2022. Under such circumstances, whether the employer can be made liable and whether the present Executive Engineer, more specifically, can be asked to repay the money, are to be decided by the writ Court upon exchange of affidavits and upon scrutinising the records in further detail. The order impugned is set aside. The writ petition shall be heard afresh, upon exchange of affidavits. 6. All parties will file their affidavits including the borrower. 5 7. Accordingly, the appeal and the application are disposed of. 8. Affidavit-in-opposition be filed within two weeks. Reply, if any, be filed within one week thereafter. 9. Liberty to mention before the learned writ Court. 10. Urgent photostat certified copy of the order, if applied for, be given to the parties, upon usual undertakings. (Shampa Sarkar, J.) (Ajay Kumar Gupta, J.)