Dismissed¶17

The Commissioner Kendriya Vidyalaya Sangathan and Ors. v. Mamata Jain

Calcutta HC7 Jul 2025WP.CT/165/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Kendriya Vidyalaya Sangathan v. Mamata Jain; W.P.C.T. No. 165 of 2024; challenge to C.A.T. Kolkata Bench order dated 15.05.2024 in O.A. No. 665 of 2024; disposal of O.A. at admission stage without counter-reply; direction to consider joining at K.V. 1, Air Force School, Kalaikunda within 15 days; direction held not an expression on merits; refusal to interfere; writ petition dismissed; subsequent Head Office communication directing acceptance of joining left unexamined as post-disposal event; Bench: Madhuresh Prasad, J. and Supratim Bhattacharya, J.; decision date 07.07.2025.

What did the court decide?

None to the petitioners; the C.A.T.'s order dated 15.05.2024 in O.A. No. 665 of 2024 is left undisturbed. ¶17

The Commissioner Kendriya Vidyalaya Sangathan and Ors. Vs Mamata Jain — Calcutta HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

None to the petitioners; the C.A.T.'s order dated 15.05.2024 in O.A. No. 665 of 2024 is left undisturbed.

¶17

Issue for consideration

Whether the writ petitioners' challenge to the C.A.T.'s order dated 15.05.2024 in O.A. No. 665 of 2024 warrants interference, given that the order merely directed consideration of the respondent's joining and did not decide the merits. +1 more

¶13

Court's answer

The direction passed by the C.A.T. in O.A. No. 665 of 2024 is not an expression on the merits of the matter pending before the C.A.T. as to whether the petitioner would be allowed to join.

¶13

Ratio / Principle

Having regard to the nature of the C.A.T.'s order, which merely requires a consideration of the respondent's joining, the Court refuses to interfere with the order dated 15.05.2024 passed by the C.A.T. in O.A. No.665 of 2024.

¶14

Key takeaways

The Court declines to examine the communication from the Head Office directing the Principal to accept the joining, treating it as a subsequent event after disposal of the O.A., which can be considered at an appropriate stage in an appropriate proceeding.obiter¶16

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Writ petition dismissed. The petitioners (Kendriya Vidyalaya Sangathan authorities) challenged an order dated 15.05.2024 of the Central Administrative Tribunal, Kolkata Bench in O.A. No. 665 of 2024, whereby the Tribunal, considering the limited relief claimed by the applicant (Mamata Jain), disposed of the O.A. at admission stage without calling for a counter-reply and directed the respondents to consider her joining at K.V. 1, Air Force School, Kalaikunda within 15 days. The Court held that the Tribunal's direction was not an expression on the merits of whether the applicant would be allowed to join, and accordingly refused to interfere with the order. A subsequent communication from the Head Office directing the Principal to accept the joining was not examined, being a post-disposal event open to consideration at an appropriate stage in an appropriate proceeding.

¶1

Ct. No.4 M/L 07.07.2025 (Naba) 05

¶2

W.P.C.T. 165 of 2024

¶3

The Commissioner Kendriya Vidyalaya Sangathan & Ors. Vs. Mamata Jain

¶4

Mr. Rabindranath Bag, Sr. Adv., Mr. Sk. Md. Wasim Akram

¶5

...for the Petitioners

¶6

Mr. Arkadipta Sengupta, Mr. Tirthankar Dey

¶7

...for the Respondent

¶8

Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners as well as the learned counsel for the respondent.

¶9

The petitioners have assailed an order passed by the Central Administrative Tribunal, Kolkata Bench (hereinafter referred to as the ‘C.A.T.’) in O.A. No. 665 of 2024. It appears that the applicant before the C.A.T. was absent from duty. Thereafter, she was seeking a direction that the present writ petitioner considers her joining. In view of the limited reliefs sought in the O.A. without any opportunity of filing opposition or hearing the present petitioner, the C.A.T. has disposed of the O.A. in the following terms :

¶10

“8. Considering the limited relief claimed by the applicant, we are in opinion to dispose the O.A. at admission stage without calling for counter-reply directing the respondents to consider the case of the applicant for joining to duty at K.V. 1, Air Force School, Kalaikunda within 15 days from the receipt of the certified copy of this order.

¶11

¶12

9. Accordingly, O.A. stands disposed of. No costs.”

¶13

In the circumstances, we find that the direction passed by the C.A.T. cannot in any way be considered to be an expression on the merits of the matter pending before the C.A.T. as to whether the petitioner would be allowed to join or not.

¶14

We, therefore, having regard to the nature of the order which merely requires a consideration of the respondent’s joining, refuse to interfere with the order dated 15.05.2024 passed by the C.A.T. in O.A. No.665 of 2024.

¶15

The learned counsel for the respondent appears and submits that there is some communication from the Head Office of the respondent directing the Principal to accept the joining.

¶16

We are not inclined to go into this issue being subsequent events after disposal of the O.A. which all can be considered at an appropriate stage in an appropriate proceeding.

¶17

The Writ Petition being W.P.C.T. No. 165 of 2024 is dismissed.

¶18

(Madhuresh Prasad, J.)

¶19

(Supratim Bhattacharya, J.)

The Commissioner Kendriya Vidyalaya Sangathan and Ors. v. Mamata Jain

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

The Commissioner Kendriya Vidyalaya Sangathan and Ors. v. Mamata Jain

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Kanishk Sinha and Anr. Vs State of West Bengal and Ors.

Ganesh Choudhary Vs Union of India and Ors.

Union of India and Anr. Vs Utpal Pandit and Ors.

The Comptroller and Auditor General of India and Ors. Vs Niraj Kumar Singh

Akash Hembram Vs Principal Secretary of Health and Family Welfare Department and Ors.

Sanjoy Adhikari and Ors. Vs Union of India and Ors.