A.O.D. No. 1453 of 1990. Case: State Of West Bengal & Ors. Vs Bejoy Chandra Mohanti Respondent. High Court of Kerala (India)
| Case Number | A.O.D. No. 1453 of 1990 |
| Counsel | For Appellant: S.K. Dutt and Chhabi Chakraborty and For Respondents: Gouri Shankar Dey and Santimoy Panda |
| Judges | B.P. Banerjee and A.K. Bhattacharya, JJ. |
| Issue | Bihar And West Bengal (transfer Of Territories) Act, 1956 - Section 41; Constitution Of India - Articles14, 16 |
| Citation | 96 CWN 1075 |
| Judgement Date | August 22, 1991 |
| Court | High Court of Kerala (India) |
Judgment:
Bhagawati Prosad Banerjee, J.
-
This appeal is against an order of the trial Judge passed in C.O. No. 1950(W) of 1990 allowing a writ-petition filed by the respondent Shri Bejoy Chandra Mahanti. The Respondent was originally an employee of the Government of Bihar being initially appointed as a Village Level worker and subsequently opting to serve under the Government of West Bengal consequent on the operation of the Bihar and West Bengal (Transfer of Territories) Act, 1956. By being absorbed in the Service of West Bengal the respondent was appointed substantively as a Gram Sevak and worked in the said post until he joined as an Assistant Farm Manager on 1-9-82. The respondent claims that under the Bihar Government Service rules by which he was governed immediately before the appointed day as mentioned in the aforesaid Act, his age of superannuation was 60 years and that-the aforesaid Act, his age of superannuation was 60 years and that the same could not be legally varied to his disadvantage except with the previous approval of the Central Government as provided in the Act. The respondent submitted an application, through proper channel, claiming his age of superannuation as sixty years and the same was duly forwarded by his superior officers but the Government rejected the same on the ground that a similar prayer made by one Ram Kinkar Mahato, ex. Assistant A.E.O. Saltora, was already rejected by the Government in consideration of the fact that the officer concerned could not be treated as a ministerial staff. This rejection of prayer has been the subject of the writ petition and the respondent petitioner has drawn the attention of the court to the fact that in some cases the prayer has been favourably considered by the government itself, and in some others the right of superannuation at the age of sixty years in respect of a number of similar transferred employees has been upheld by this court by issuing several writs of Mandamus.
-
In the trial court the present appellants did not file any affidavit-in-opposition in spite of sufficient time having been allowed to them for this purpose and the learned Trial Judge refused to grant any further time considering the exigency of the circumstances. The learned trial Judge considered the prayer of the writ petitioner with reference to the relevant law and the policy of the Government and found that Government had actually granted continuation of service in respect of certain other employees up to 60 years in similar circumstances and observed that no discrimination could be made in respect of the petitioner. He also noted that similar prayer was granted by this Court in writ petitions field by several other employees. Considering the entire circumstances he allowed the writ petition and issued a writ in the nature of mandamus directing the Government not to interfere with the service of the writ petitioner until he attains the age of sixty years.
-
On behalf of the appellants...
To continue reading
Request your trial