Steephen Raj v. The Honorable Calcutta High Court And ORS.

IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA

[ CIRCUIT BENCH AT PORT BLAIR ] ...

WPA/139/2022 Steephen Raj ... Petitioner Vs.

The Honorable Calcutta High Court and others ... Respondents Mr. Gopala Binnu Kumar ... for the petitioner Mr. Mohd. Tabraiz ...

for the respondents April 28, 2022 [GNC] Item No. 8 The petition was appointed as a direct recruitee to the post of Assistant Court Officer by an order No.301 dated September 19, 2003. The petitioner continued to discharge his duty in the Circuit Bench of the Calcutta High Court at Port Blair. By an order No. 31 dated February 25, 2010, the petitioner was promoted to the post of Assistant Registrar (Court with effect from February 25, 2010. The petitioner continues to work in the said post.

The petitioner submits that the second financial upgradation, on completion of 16 years of continuous service in the Registry has become due and payable to the petitioner under the Modified Career Advancement Scheme.

Accordingly, the petitioner filed a representation dated March 2, 2018 before the learned Registrar, Circuit

Bench at Port Blair to grant him the 2nd financial upgradation which is due and payable. The learned Registrar, Circuit Bench at Port Blair forwarded the representation of the petitioner to the learned Registrar General, High Court, Calcutta. Two reminders were also sent to the learned Registrar General.

The petitioner seeks that the second financial upgradation in terms of the Modified Career Advancement Scheme, upon implementation of the Revision of Pay and Allowances, 2019, should be granted to the petitioner in terms of his representation.

Under such circumstances, this Court is of the opinion that the Registrar General, High Court, Calcutta must act and proceed on the basis of the representation filed by the petitioner and the reminders sent by the learned Registrar, Circuit Bench at Port lair and take necessary steps in accordance with law with the expedition that the matter deserves.

This Court has not gone into the merits of the claims of the petitioner and as no affidavit has been called, the allegations are deemed to have been denied. The writ petition stands disposed of.

The parties are directed to act on the server copy of this order.

(Shampa Sarkar, J.)