28/08 2026 AD/08/18 266312 NANDY (DO) In the High Court at Calcutta Constitutional Writ Jurisdiction Appellate Side WPA/21044/2026 PRATIP RUDRA VS THE STATE OF WEST BENGAL & ORS. Mr. Manijendra Narayan Roy, Advocate Mr. Gourav Halder, Advocate ……for the Petitioner Mr. Anindya Basu, Advocate Mr. Sukanta Banerjee, Advocate ……for the State 1. Affidavit of service and Supplementary Affidavit filed on behalf of the petitioner, be kept with the record. 2. The petitioner is aggrieved that after facing a disciplinary proceeding, and being meted out a punishment under Rule 8(iv) of the West Bengal Services (Classification, Control and Appeal) Rules, 1971 (in short the said Rules), he has not been given a promotion. 3. Mr. Roy, learned Advocate appearing for the petitioner, submits that the punishment meted out to the petitioner in terms of the proceeding before the disciplinary authority was limited to Rule 8(iv) of the said Rules. This entire disciplinary proceeding and the punishment meted out has been challenged and is pending adjudication before the West Bengal State Administrative Tribunal. 4. His submission, however, is that the punishment meted out does not debar a promotion. Rule 8(iv) specifies certain punishments including reduction of increment and postponement of P a g e | 2 future increments, but does not relate to the promotion of an incumbent being stopped or cancelled. This provision is entailed in Rule 8(v). 5. Since the punishment meted out to the petitioner is specifically under Rule 8(iv), the consequences of Rule 8(v) cannot be foisted on the petitioner. Thus, foisting of Rule 8(v) on the petitioner is beyond the punishment meted out and is purely illegal and arbitrary. 6. Mr. Basu, learned senior Government Advocate appearing for the State respondents, submits that the proceedings are pending before the West Bengal State Administrative Tribunal since 2026. Thus, this writ petition should not be entertained. 7. Though the consistent stand of the petitioner is that this writ-petition is severable from the proceedings pending before the West Bengal State Administrative Tribunal, the petitioner presently does not place his case any higher than consideration of the representation dated June 11, 2026, made to the Secretary, Government of West Bengal, PHE Department. 8. In view of the petitioner's claim, let the representation be considered by respondent no. 2 and a reasoned order be passed by September 30, 2026 which shall be communicated to the petitioner within a week thereafter. 9. The petitioner will intimate the concerned Secretary a server copy of this order. P a g e | 3 10. I make it clear that consideration of the representation, as afore-stated, shall not in any manner affect the challenge to the disciplinary proceedings pending before the West Bengal State Administrative Tribunal. The same will also not create any rights or equities in favor of the petitioner insofar as the pending proceeding is concerned. 11. With the afore-stated directions, the writ- petition is disposed of. No order as to costs. 12. All parties to act on a server copy of this order duly downloaded from the website of this Court. (Reetobroto Kumar Mitra, J.)