In WPA 23646 of 1997, the petitioner alleged violation of a March 8, 2024 order regarding disciplinary proceedings. The court dismissed the extension application as settlement of appeal was withdrawn. CPAN 22 of 2025, regarding monetary reliefs, was disposed of without explicit relief.
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.
Court No. 6
CPAN 22 of 2025
(265719)
07.08.2025 (AD 343)
Smt. Tultuli Das
Vs. Sri Hirdyesh Mohan, IAS & Anr.
(S. Banerjee)
in WPA 23646 of 1997
CAN 5 of 2024 (not in file)
Ms. Debjani Sengupta Mr. Abhijit Chatterjee Ms. S. Haque Ms. Kayel Bag
…for the petitioner
Mr. Sirsanya Bandyopadhyay Ms. Tapati Samanta …for the alleged contemnor nos. 1 to 4
Re: CAN 5 of 2024
This is an application alleging willful and deliberate violation of the order dated March 8, 2024.
This court is informed that the original CAN 5 of 2024 is not available in the record.
Ms. Sengupta undertakes to supply a copy of such application by tomorrow.
The photocopy of such application shall be treated to be the original till the original application is traced out.
2
Department is directed to trace out the original application and to tag the same along with the record of this case.
Learned advocate appearing for the alleged contemnor no. 7 submits that the school authority has filed an application being CAN 5 of 2024 praying for extension of time to complete the disciplinary proceedings in terms of the order dated March 8, 2024.
Ms. Sengupta, learned advocate appearing for the petitioners submits that the school authorities did not take prompt steps to initiate and conclude the disciplinary proceedings pursuant to the liberty granted by this court. She further submits that the petitioner attained the age of superannuation on January 31, 2025 and after that date a fresh chargesheet was issued by the school authority which is under challenge in a writ petition which is still pending. She seriously opposed the prayer for extension of time to complete the disciplinary proceedings. She further submits that the school authority preferred an appeal against the aforesaid judgment which was dismissed as withdrawn and subsequently the petitioners have not been notified about filing of any appeal thereafter.
3
Since the order was challenged in an appeal which was dismissed as withdrawn, this court is not inclined to extend the time to conclude the disciplinary proceedings.
In view thereof, the application being CAN 5 of 2024 stands dismissed.
Re: CPAN 22 of 2025
Affidavit of service filed in Court today, is taken on record.
The alleged contemnor nos. 1 to 4 are represented.
This court by the order dated March 8, 2024 had set aside the order of punishment dated October 4, 1997 and the petitioner was given liberty to take steps if the petitioner was entitled to same monetory reliefs.
Ms. Sengupta submits that pursuant to this order a representation has been submitted before the school authorities praying for monetary reliefs as well as other reliefs.
If the petitioner is aggrieved by the inaction on the part of the school authorities with regard to any representation which may have been submitted, it will
4
be open to the petitioner to work out her remedies in accordance with law.
With the above observations, CPAN 22 of 2025 stands disposed of.
(Hiranmay Bhattacharyya, J.)
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the school authority deserves extension of time to complete disciplinary proceedings.
Whether the petitioner is entitled to immediate monetary reliefs after the set aside of punishment.
Smt. Tultuli Das
Sri Hirdyesh Mohan, IAS
Hiranmay Bhattacharyya
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
