Petitioner challenging non-promotion retired post-filing; HC dismissed writ as claim infructuous upon payment of full retirement benefits per prior coordinate bench order.
Writ petition dismissed on merits as the matter is now infructuous due to retirement and full pension payment.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
Form No. J(1)
IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION APPELLATE SIDE
Present: The Hon’ble Justice Bibek Chaudhuri
WPA 16454 of 2003
Anindya Kumar Chatterjee Vs.
Managing Director, L.I.C. of India & Ors.
For the Respondent: Mr. D.K.Kundu, Adv. Mr. A.Basu, Adv.
Heard on : 11.08.2021
Judgment on : 16.09.2021
Bibek Chaudhuri, J.:
Petitioner remains unrepresented.
Learned Advocate for the respondents is present.
On the basis of the submission made by the learned Advocate for the respondents, the instant writ petition is taken up for hearing.
The petitioner was an employee of Life Insurance Corporation (hereinafter L.I.C. for short). In the instant writ petition he challenged a promotion list published by the L.I.C. Authority on 29th April, 2002, as his name did not find place in such promotional post.
2
During pendency of the instant writ petition, the petitioner retired from service on superannuation. Subsequently, he filed writ petition being No.WP 24829(W) of 2007 raising his grievance in respect of finalization of the amount of commuted pension. The same writ petition was disposed of by a Coordinate Bench of this Court on 24th June, 2008 directing the respondent authority to consider a representation to be filed by the writ petitioner making his claim of retiral benefits.
It is further submitted by the learned Advocate for the respondents that the issue has already been finally settled and final payment of retiral benefit was paid to the petitioner.
In view of such circumstances and on acceptance of final retiral benefits, grievance against promotional post, when the petitioner was in service becomes infructuous.
I have carefully perused the contention of the petitioner made in the instant writ petition as well as in WP No.24829(W) of 2007. I am in conformity with the learned Advocate for the respondents that the instant writ petition becomes infructuous in view of petitioner’s retirement on superannuation and on full and final payment of retiral benefits.
Accordingly, the instant writ petition is dismissed on merit.
(Bibek Chaudhuri, J.)
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the writ petition challenging non-promotion becomes infructuous after the petitioner retires receives superannuation and commuted pension.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Coordinate Bench of this CourtReferred¶16
WP No.24829(W) of 2007
Anindya Kumar Chatterjee
Managing Director, L.I.C. of India
Bibek Chaudhuri
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
