Anindita Das v. State Of West Bengal And ORS.

IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA

CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION APPELLATE SIDE

Present:

The Hon'ble Justice Debangsu Basak And The Hon'ble Justice Md. Shabbar Rashidi With IA NO: CAN/1/2025, CAN/2/2025 ANINDITA DAS VS THE STATE OF WEST BENGAL AND ORS.

For the Appellant : Mr. Sankar Prasad Dalapati, Advocate Ms. Asumdipta Santra, Advocate For the State : Mr. Asish Kumar Guha, Advocate Mr. Rajendra Chaturvedi, Advocate For the Private Respondent: Mr. Sukanta Chakraborty, Advocate Mr. Anindya Halder, Advocate Heard & Judgment on: September 22, 2025 Md. Shabbar Rashidi, J.

1. Appeal is directed against an order dated May 15, 2025 passed in WPA 13750 of 2023.

2. By the impugned order learned Single Judge disposed of the writ petition by holding that, "Having regard to the nature of the dispute, I

am of the prima facie opinion that there is a difference between the school administration and the present petitioner facing inconveniences outside the school premises. In case the petitioner is faced with inconveniences which is blown out of proportion, petitioner would inform the same to the police authorities who would take steps in accordance with law."

3. It is submitted on behalf of the learned advocate for the writ petitioner that the writ petitioner is a teacher in a school. She is being harassed by the school authorities in several ways. He lodged complaints with regard to the actions of such authorities but the police did not take any steps and act on the complaint so lodged by the writ petitioner.

4. On the other hand, learned advocate appearing for the private respondent submits that the writ petitioner is in the habit of picking up disputes with the school authorities. She is very much reluctant to the work environment of the school. She does not pay any heed to the decisions taken by the school administration for proper running of the school. Learned advocate for the private respondent also submits that the writ petitioner was issued with a show cause notice for her misdeeds in the school. The writ petitioner answered to the show cause in pursuance of such notice with no reasons at all. Learned advocate for the private respondent submits that the writ petitioner has developed a habit of picking up disputes with the school administration

and has been threatening to take up the matter to the police authorities taking advantage of her being a lady.

5. We have heard the submissions made on behalf of the parties and considered the materials placed before us as also took into account the impugned order where the learned Single Judge was of the opinion that there were differences between the school administration and the writ petitioner. It has been alleged, on behalf of the private respondent that the writ petitioner is a habitual late comer to school. She does not pay any heed to the requests and directions issued by the school administration. In spite of that, by the impugned order, the learned Single Judge granted liberty to the writ petitioner to the effect that in case the writ petitioner faced with inconvenience which is blown out of proportion, the writ petitioner will inform the same to the police authority who would take steps in accordance with law.

6. The writ petitioner had filed the writ petition seeking the following reliefs :- "a) A writ of and/or in the nature of Mandamus commanding respondent authorities more, particularly the Respondent No. 8 to immediately submit report in respect to the two G.D.E being No. 359 dated 12.12.2021 and No. 760 dated 23.09.2022 lodged by your petitioner and to take emergent steps for restoration of rights, position and honour of the petitioner which have been illegally scrubbed off by the accused persons;

b) A writ of and/or in the nature of Mandamus commanding respondent authorities, more particularly the Respondent No.6, to depute some officers having the same rank of the Officer-in-Charge and Sub-Divisional Police Officer other than the Officer-in-Charge and SubDivisional Police Officer in the present case. c) A writ of and/ or in the nature Mandamus commanding respondent authorities, more particularly the Respondent No. 6 to immediately direct the deputed officer as aforesaid for conducting appropriate enquiry against the accused persons by collecting the CCTV footage of relevant dates, if required and also to relate the footages with the attendance register i.e.

on 01.09.2022, 11.11.2022, 12.11.2022, 23.11.2022, and 26.12.2022 till 31.12.2022.

d) A Writ and/ or in the nature of Mandamus do issue, commanding the respondents authorities, more particularly the deputed officers, to provide police assistance to the petitioner in the school premises for the time being;

e) A writ of and/or in the nature of Mandamus commanding the Respondent authorities to take necessary steps upon due consideration of the various representations that have been submitted by the petitioner before the police authorities.

f) A writ in the Certiorari to issue calling upon the respondents to certify and transmit the record of the instant case of this Hon'ble Court so that conscionable Justice may be done by passing proper order;

g) Rule NISI in terms of the prayer (a) and (b) and (c) and (d) as above;

h) Pass an interim order in terms of prayers (a),(b) and (c) as above;

i) Ad interim order in terms of prayer (a), (b), (c) above;

j) Pass any order as to costs;

k) Pass such other order and/or orders, direction and/or directions as Your Lordships may deem fit and proper in the interest of justice, equity and good conscience."

7. In the facts and circumstances of the case, the impugned order directs the police authorities to take steps in accordance with law, if an information is lodged by the petitioner. Such direction in the order impugned takes care of the grievances of the petitioner raised in the writ petition. A police officer enquiring or investigating an incident should not be directed to do a specific thing or forbidden from doing specific act in such investigation or enquiry.

8. In such circumstances, we find no reason to interfere with the impugned order and the same is affirmed accordingly.

9. MAT/1495/2025 is disposed of accordingly.

(Md. Shabbar Rashidi, J.)

10. I agree (Debangsu Basak, J.) Dd