Union Of India And ORS. v. Smt Mousumi Dasgupta

20th August, 2025 (D/L No.57) Ct. No.4 (SKB) W.P.C.T.68 of 2025 Union of India and others

Versus

Smt. Mousumi Dasgupta Mr. Sanajit Kumar Ghosh, Ms. Tanusree Ghosh ... for the petitioners.

Ms. Soma Chowdhury Bandhu, ... for the respondent.

1. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioners that the petitioners have paid admissible salary to the applicant/respondent other than that which is pending consideration in the Original Application before the Central Administrative Tribunal, Kolkata Bench (in short 'Tribunal'). The pleadings are also complete before the Tribunal and the matter is ready for hearing.

2. The present writ petition has been filed against an interim order, and now has become infructuous in view of the subsequent developments. The learned counsel for the petitioners, therefore, seeks a direction upon the Tribunal to dispose of the O.A. within a stipulated timeframe.

3. We are not inclined to circumscribe the adjudicatory process before the Tribunal within a

specified timeframe and would only to observe it is expected that the Tribunal would proceed with the matter expeditiously without granting any unnecessary adjournments or undue delay.

4. The writ petitioner is, thus, disposed of.

5. We record that the present order may not be deemed to be an expression of the court with regard to the matter pending before the Tribunal and all issues are left open.

6. Learned counsel for the petitioner informs the court that there is an omission to mention the name of the advocate on record (Tanusree Ghosh) in the earlier orders dated 21st May, 2025 and 19th June, 2025.

7. Let the name of Tanusree Ghosh, learned advocate, be read in the two orders dated 21st May, 2025 and 19th June, 2025 as appearing for the petitioners. The two orders stand modified accordingly.

(Madhuresh Prasad, J.) (Supratim Bhattacharya, J.)