Arka Das v. The Visa Bharati And ORS

WP 210 of 2020 IA No:GA 1 of 2020

IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA

Constitutional Writ Jurisdiction ORIGINAL SIDE ARKA DAS

Versus

THE VISA BHARATI AND ORS.

BEFORE:

The Hon'ble JUSTICE DEBANGSU BASAK Date : 4th September, 2020.

Appearance:

Mr. Anjan Bhattacharya, Adv.

Mr. Santanu Chatterjee, Adv.

Ms. Anita Shaw, Adv.

...for the petitioner.

Mr. Victor Chatterjee, Adv.

...for the respondent no.1.

The Court : In this writ petition the petitioner complains that despite the order dated February 27, 2020 passed in WP No.67 of 2020, the respondent no.1 did not act thereon. Learned advocate appearing for the petitioner submits that the respondent no.1 required few documents from the petitioner. The petitioner submitted those documents. Despite the same, the respondent no.1 is not acting in terms of the order dated February 27, 2020.

Learned advocate appearing for the respondent no.1 submits that, the respondent authorities are acting in terms of the order dated February 27, 2020. It is the petitioner who is taking time and not cooperating with the respondent authorities.

The allegations of the respondents are denied by the petitioner.

There is an order dated February 27, 2020 which permits the petitioner to submit a fresh representation to the respondent no.2 along with relevant documents with a prayer for regularisation of his absence for the period from December 2, 2019 onwards till the resumption of his duties. It is admitted that the petitioner made a representation in terms of the order dated February 27, 2020. The respondent authorities are considering such representation. In such circumstances, since the petitioner made the representation in terms of the order dated February 27, 2020 and the respondent authorities are yet to decide on the same, it would be appropriate to direct the respondent authorities to decide such representation within four weeks from date.

It is clarified that the respondent authorities are at liberty not to grant any adjournment to the petitioner. It is further clarified that the petitioner will be entitled to be represented in the hearing through one legal representative of his choice.

Accordingly, WP No.210 of 2020 stands disposed of. In view of disposal of WP NO.210 of 2020, the application, GA No.1 of 2020 has become infructuous and also stands disposed of. (DEBANGSU BASAK, J.) s.pal