- (1.) The petitioner belonged to the Indian Police Service. He was the Additional Director General of Police (Provisioning), West Bengal Police, when he retired from service on February 28, 2014 having reached the age of superannuation. Seeking orders for quashing of two departmental proceedings initiated against him vide charge-sheets dated November 22, 2012 and May 15, 2013, the petitioner had the occasion to approach the Central Administrative Tribunal, Calcutta (hereafter the tribunal) by filing two original applications (OA No.1122 of 2012 and OA No.506 of 2013). Feeling aggrieved by the orders dated March 19 and 20, 2014 passed by the tribunal on such applications, two writ petitions (tribunal applications, as they are commonly called) have been preferred by the Chief Secretary, Government of West Bengal and the Additional Chief Secretary, Home Department and Home Secretary, Govt. of West Bengal (hereafter the first and the second proforma respondents, when referred to collectively) being WPCT Nos. 90-91 of 2014. The said writ petitions were called on for consideration on May 13, 2014 by the Hon'ble Division Bench having determination. Since one of the members of the Hon'ble Division Bench was not inclined to hear the writ petitions, the same were directed to be placed before the Hon'ble the Chief Justice for necessary orders. The Hon'ble the Chief Justice has specially assigned the said two writ petitions by orders dated June 3, 2014 for hearing by the Hon'ble Division Bench presided over by the senior most puisne judge of this Court (hereafter DB-II). These orders of assignment form the subject matter of challenge in these two writ petitions.
(2.) Since common issues of fact and law are involved, I shall proceed to dispose of the two writ petitions by this common judgment and order.
(3.) Mr. Samanta, learned advocate for the petitioner contended that the petitioner has been subjected to very unfair treatment, which has compelled him to challenge the orders of assignment made by the Hon'ble the Chief Justice. According to him, well in advance of the impugned orders of assignment, the petitioner had expressed by his letter dated April 11, 2014 that the writ petitions may be assigned to any bench other than DB-II, yet, it is the said DB to which the writ petitions have been assigned.;