JYOTIRMAY BHATTACHARYA, J. - (1.) THIS mandamus appeal is directed against the judgement and/or order passed by a Learned Single Judge of this Court on 24th January, 2014 in W.P.No. 1644(W) of 2009 by which the impugned order of termination of service of the writ petitioner dated 24th December, 2008 issued by the College authority was set aside and the concerned authority was directed to take appropriate steps against the writ petitioner in terms of the show -cause notice issued by the College authority and the reply given by the writ petitioner thereto. The Learned Trial Judge held that the writ petitioner would be entitled to get her salary continuously. Direction was given upon the College authority to pay the arrear salary to the writ petitioner within four months from the date of communication of His Lordship's said order. The legality and/or correctness of the said order is under challenge in this mandamus appeal at the instance of the College authority.
(2.) LET us now consider the merit of the instant appeal in the facts of the instant case. Admittedly the writ petitioner/respondent no.1 was appointed as a temporary part -time employee in the Morning Section of Vivekananda College for Women with effect from 26th September, 2003 to 22nd December, 2003. It was stipulated in the appointment letter issued by the College authority that the writ petitioner/respondent no.1 was required to abide by the terms and conditions stipulated by the College authority. The terms and conditions which the writ petitioner/respondent no.1 was required to comply with are as follows : - "(i) Strict punctuality should be maintained and (ii) 3 days absent means deduction of 1 day salary." Such contractual engagement of the writ petitioner/respondent no.1 was extended by the College authority from time to time till 16th March, 2005. Thereafter though no formal extension was given for renewing such contract, but, in fact, the writ petitioner was allowed to continue till 1st January, 2009. The College authority was not satisfied with the service which the writ petitioner/respondent no.1 was rendering to the College authority for various reasons such as want of punctuality, irregularity in attendance, not performing her duties to the satisfaction of the College authority etc. Accordingly, a show - cause notice was issued by the College authority on 17th July, 2008. By the said show -cause notice, the writ petitioner/respondent no.1 was called upon to submit her explanation in writing within seven days from the date of issue of the notice as to why no disciplinary proceedings should not be initiated against the writ petitioner/respondent no.1 for her prolonged willful and deliberate misconduct, dereliction of duty, negligence in her duty and work and unauthorized frequent absence from duty. The writ petitioner/respondent no.1 submitted her reply to the said show - cause notice to the College authority vide her letter dated 27th July, 2008.
(3.) SUBSEQUENTLY the Governing Body of the said College in its meeting held on 20th December, 2008 unanimously resolved not to proceed with the show -cause since the writ petitioner/respondent no.1 was engaged as a temporary employee and she was not appointed in any sanctioned post in the Morning Section of the College. Considering the workload of the Morning Section of the said College and the paucity of fund, the Governing Body of the said College resolved unanimously to disengage the writ petitioner/respondent no.1 as her service was no longer required with effect from 2nd January, 2009. The said decision of the Governing Body of the said College was challenged by the writ petitioner/respondent no.1 herein in the writ petition. We have already mentioned above as to how the said writ petition was ultimately decided by the Learned Trial Judge.;