SAMAR KUMAR ROY Vs. JHARNA ROY
LAWS(CAL)-2006-12-3
HIGH COURT OF CALCUTTA
Decided on December 12,2006

SAMAR KUMAR ROY Appellant
VERSUS
JHARNA ROY Respondents

JUDGEMENT

- (1.) This revisional application under Article 227 of the Constitution of India is for setting aside the order contained in letter No.650/CC/WC-06 dated FD/04 (203) 13.05.2006 passed by the West Bengal Commission of Woman, Kolkata.
(2.) By the said letter the Employment Officer-in-Charge, District Employment Exchange, Jangipur was asked to release the salary of the present petitioner which was withheld previously. By the said letter 1/3rd salary of the present petitioner was asked to be deducted from the month of November 2005 and to send the same directly to his wife Jharna Roy.
(3.) The fact leading to the filing of the instant revisional application may be summed up as follows : - (i) That the present petitioner joined as Lower Division Clerk under the Directorate of Employment in the year 1996 and was transferred to Jangipur Employment/Exchange on 14th March, 2005. He was working at Rabindra Bharati University on deputation. He was asked by the Deputy Chief of U.E.I and GB vide his letter dated 25.7.2005 to appear in person before the Chairperson of West Bengal Commission for Woman on 3.8.2005 at 1.30 p.m. on the basis of complaint against him. The petitioner by his letter dated 27.7.2005 asked the Chairperson, West Bengal Commission for Woman that as he was not aware regarding nature of the complaint lodged by the opposite party, he requested to supply him with the copy of the complaint. He did not receive any reply from the said commission. (ii) On 11.11.2005 the petitioner also received one letter from the Deputy Chief UEI & GB vide his letter dated 7.11.2005 by which he was directed to appear in person on 8.11.2005 at about 1.00 p.m. before the said commission failing which the matter would be viewed seriously and disciplinary measure as per Government Rules should be taken up against him. As the petitioner received the letter on 11.11.2005, the question of appearing before the commission on 7.11.2005 does not arise. In the said letter the Additional Director, Directorate of Employment specifically instructed the Employment Officer-in-Charge, District Employment Exchange, Jangipur that unless the petitioner appear before the West Bengal Commission for Woman, his salary will be withheld as instructed by the West Bengal Commission for Woman. The petitioner asked the authority for releasing his salary. Though he received his salary for the month of October 2005, his salary was not paid for the month of November 2005. It is the case of the present petitioner that West Bengal Commission for Woman is not at all empowered under the statute to give any direction upon the employer of the petitioner to withhold his salary to ensure his presence before the said commission. The present petitioner moved before the Hon'ble High Court as per provision of Article 226 of the Constitution of India which was numbered as W.P. No. 23752 (W) of 2005 where he prayed for relief as per prayer made in the said application. However, the said application was disposed of by the learned Single Judge without interfering with the act of the Commission against which he moved before the Division Bench which was numbered as M. A. T. No. 348 of 2006. Subsequently, he received one letter dated 23.3.2006 in which the Chairperson, West Bengal Commission for Woman asked the Director of Employment Exchange to release his salary which was withheld but directed that 1/3rd of the petitioner's salary should be deducted from the month of November 2005 and the same should be sent directly to the Opposite Party-Jharna Roy. The said appeal being M.A.T. No. 348 of 2006 was withdrawn on 10.4.2006 and there was specific observation that "withdrawal of the said appeal should not be viewed to the prejudice to either of the parties". (iii) Thereafter, the present petitioner made representation on 25.4.2006 before the Commission requesting him to supply the document as per list given in Paragraph-22 of the revisional application. As those were not supplied, the instant application has been filed without getting certified copy of the alleged order.;


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