SC and HC Judgments Online at MyNation

Judgments of Supreme Court of India and High Courts

Prasenjit Bhakat vs The State Of West Bengal & Ors on 14 May, 2018


Ct. No. 29.

W.P. 25366 (W) of 2017

Prasenjit Bhakat
The State of West Bengal Ors.

Mr. Lal Ratan Mandal,
Mr. Dilip Kumar Sadhu
….. For the Petitioner.

Md. Yasin Ali,
Ms. Tapati Samanta
….. For the State.

Party/Parties are represented in the order of their
name/names as printed above in the cause title.

Md. Yasin Ali, Learned State Counsel reverts to this Court
with instructions as directed by the previous order of this Court
dated 28th of November, 2017.

At the core of the issue is the Memorandum dated 1st of
August, 2017 issued by the Block Development Officer, Jhargram
Development Block/the Respondent No. 5 to this petition

invoking the provisions of G.O. No. 9008-F(P), dated 16th of
September, 2011 of the Finance Department Audit Branch,
Government of West Bengal and, particularly paragraph-(xi)
thereto which permits disengagement of casual/daily
rated/contractual workers in the event they are
involved/discovered during the course of their employment to be
involved in a criminal case.


Mr. Mandal submits that the provisions of the Memo
dated 16th of September, 2011 would normally not apply to the
writ petitioner since he is yet to complete 10 (ten) years and above
of service and the provisions of the said Memo (supra) are purely
designed to confer benefits and/or, alternately, take away benefits
qua any contractual engagement of 10 (ten) years and above.

Mr. Ali, Learned State Counsel submits that the principle
enshrined at paragraph-(xi) (supra) ought to be independently
construed having regard to the depth of the criminal charges
brought against the incumbent in issue.

In the facts of the present case the petitioner has been
directly arraigned as an accused connected to the death of his
wife with charges filed under Sections 498A/304B/34 of the
Indian Penal Code along with Sections 3 and 4 of the Dowry
Prohibition Act.

Therefore, Mr. Ali submits that paragraph-(xi) cannot be
read differently in respect of two classes of contractual
engagements viz. one of 10 (ten) years and above and the other
below 10 (ten) years since the principles of service jurisprudence
connected to pending criminal proceedings ought to uniformly
apply to all.

This Court, at this stage, is prima facie persuaded to
accept the submissions of Learned State Counsel and therefore
permits the State-respondents to place their stand by way of an

Let affidavit-in-opposition be prepared within a period of
nine weeks from date; reply thereto, if any, within three weeks


Liberty to mention strictly upon notice to the other side
after the period granted to exchange affidavits is complete.

Urgent photostat certified copies of this order, if applied
for, be given to the parties upon compliance of all necessary

(Subrata Talukdar, J.)

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Copyright © 2021 SC and HC Judgments Online at MyNation

Free Legal Help, Just WhatsApp Away

MyNation HELP line

We are Not Lawyers, but No Lawyer will give you Advice like We do

Please read Group Rules – CLICK HERE, If You agree then Please Register CLICK HERE and after registration  JOIN WELCOME GROUP HERE

We handle Women Centric biased laws like False Sectioin 498A IPC, Domestic Violence(DV ACT), Divorce, Maintenance, Alimony, Child Custody, HMA 24, 125 CrPc, 307, 312, 313, 323, 354, 376, 377, 406, 420, 497, 506, 509; TEP, RTI and many more…

MyNation FoundationMyNation FoundationMyNation Foundation