ARINDAM SINHA,J. - (1.) Record of submissions and observations in order dated 10th July, 2018 are reproduced below: "Petitioner has challenged deduction at the rate of 50% per month of her salary since April, 2017 on account of excess leave. She seeks release of payment of full salary since then. On last occasion, minutes of Governing Body meeting held on 17th April, 2017 authorising such deduction was shown to Court. In effect, challenge of petitioner is against this decision. Mr. Mal, learned Advocate appears on behalf of petitioner and submits, it would appear from the minutes, 158 days excess leave has been alleged. Minutes refers to his client's appeal letter dated 5th July, 2017 for adjustment of leave as she was performing research related work. He relies on following in the minutes: "President, Governing Body pointed out that, since there is no provision of adjusting such leaves in the statute. He suggested that, a letter may be sought from the Govt. of India, requesting the Govt. of West Bengal regarding sanction of leave for the project undertaken by Dr. Chatterjee as a very special case."
(2.) He submits, in spite of the above, resolution as in the minutes was that there should be deduction of salary. He reiterates that of the grant to his client, 15% went to the college.
(3.) Mr. Sarkar, learned Advocate appears on behalf of the college. He produces documents including extract from minutes of meeting dated 20th January, 2017 of Governing Body. It appears, Governing Body in that meeting had resolved to commence pay cut of petitioner to balance her excess leave. He submits, total excess leave of petitioner is 206 days. Salary deduction to be made for those 206 days is Rs. 7,40,225/-. A sum of Rs. 1,64,906/- is still to be recovered or adjusted against petitioner's salary. He disputes that the college kept 15% of grant received by petitioner. He submits, it was 10% aggregating to Rs. 15,57,870/- over the period of time in which petitioner did research as entrusted by Indian National Centre for Ocean Information Services, Ministry of Earth Sciences, Government of India. He also relies on leave rules for teachers of affiliated non-Government colleges under Calcutta University as in Memorandum dated 3rd December, 2009 issued by Government of West Bengal, Higher Education Department. He submits with reference to such rules, period of leave taken by petitioner is in excess of 206 days in the matter of doing research work. Available leave petitioner entitlement of petitioner was adjusted after which 206 days became excess leave. Hence the deduction. "A cursory perusal of leave rules shows two categories of leave that may be applicable to the petitioner. One is on duty absence by a teacher with permission of Governing Body on account of duties assigned by Government or constitutional authority or authorities mentioned. Another category is study leave for research directly related to the teachers work in the college as may be granted by the Governing Body. What is noticed by this Court is that in seeking to recover Rs.7,40,225/- as excess leave taken by petitioner for research work sanctioned by aforesaid authority, the college as per its instructions to its learned Advocate has received Rs.15,57,870/- as overhead expenses. Governing Body to be able to resist challenge of petitioner must satisfy this Court it was unaware of what petitioner was doing in the period she was absent from work, that it was against the decision of Governing Body for her to have researched. It does appear to be so since the sum of Rs.15,57,870/- has been appropriated by the college. College might also have to answer regarding what overhead expenses it incurred due to such absence of petitioner.";