SANTOSH KUMAR ROY Vs. OFFICIAL RECEIVER, CALCUTTA HIGH COURT AND OTHERS
LAWS(CAL)-1983-7-33
HIGH COURT OF CALCUTTA
Decided on July 28,1983

SANTOSH KUMAR ROY Appellant
VERSUS
OFFICIAL RECEIVER, CALCUTTA HIGH COURT Respondents

JUDGEMENT

- (1.) The Calcutta Official Receiver's Act, 1938 (hereinafter referred to as the said Act), was enacted, for the purpose of making provisions for the administration and control of the Official Receiver of the High Court in Calcutta and under Section 11 of the said Act, the State Government has been empowered to make rules for carrying into effect the objects of the same in regard to the functions of the Official Receiver. In terms of the provisions of the said Act, by notification No. 1517J dated 27th April 1939, in exercise of the powers conferred by Section 11 of the said Act, the Governor was pleased to make the necessary rules for carrying into effect the objects of the said Act relating to the functions of the Official Receiver of the High Court in Calcutta, those rules would hereinafter be referred as the said Rules. Under the provisions of the said Act "Official Receiver" would mean the Official Receiver of the Court and apart from Official Receiver, there may be one or more Deputy Official Receivers. In terms of Section 3(2) of the said Act the offices of Official Receiver and of Deputy Official Receivers (if any) would be civil post under the Government of India and sub-section (3) of the said Act makes it clear that subject to the provisions of sub-section 6(2) of the said Act all rights, privileges, titles and liabilities of the Official Receiver subsisting immediately prior to the commencement of the said Act shall accrue to and vest in the Official Receiver appointed under the said Act. The said Act came into force on and from 22nd September 1938. Thus on the basis of the definition as referred to hereinbefore, there would be no difficulty in holding that the posts of Official Receiver or Deputy Official Receiver (if any) would be civil posts and the question on the pleadings of this case amongst others would be, whether employees employed or appointed by the Official Receiver or Deputy Official Receiver as the case may be, would also be holders of civil posts or post in public employment or the posts as held by them, should be considered as public appointment.
(2.) The petitioner has stated that he has been in the service of the Official Receiver Respondent No. 1 for more than 21 years and at the time of obtaining the Rule, which was on 21st January 1977, he was engaged as Estate Clerk at a total salary of Rs. 230/- per month, from four separate Estates to which he had been appointed. His claims of appointment as Estate Clerk has been contradicted by the answering Respondents stating that, he was appointed as a Collecting Sarkar.
(3.) It was the case of the petitioner that the consolidated fund of the State of West Bengal is liable to make good any liability incurred by the official Receiver as Receiver appointed by the High Court at Calcutta and the said Official Receiver is also authorised to charge fees, pay the same into such consolidated fund of the State and to withdraw therefrom, sums required to administer the affairs of his office or make investment therefrom. It has also been stated and ns indicated above, the State Government had the power and in the instant case in exercise of such powers the said Rules, for the carrying into effect of the objects of the said Act, with regard to the functions of the Official Receiver, have been framed.;


Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.