Disposed

Bhaskar Dasgupta v. the State of Tripura and Ors.

Tripura HC29 Jun 2017WP(C)/557/2017

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This petition sought an extension of time to complete departmental proceedings against a government servant. The petitioners argued that formalities remained pending despite serving the report, requesting one month. The court extended the deadline to 31.12.2017, reiterating the threat of discharge if the limit is missed.

What did the court decide?

Extension of time granted to 31.12.2017 for passing final order in departmental proceedings.

Noting by Officer or Serial Date Office notes, reports, orders or Advocate No Proceedings with signature
BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE S. TALAPATRA 03.11.2017
Heard Mr. G.S. Bhattacharjee, learned counsel appearing for the respondent-petitioners as well as Mr. A. Lodh, learned counsel appearing for the writ petitioner-respondent. This is a petition for extension of time as framed by this court by its judgment and order dated 29.06.2017. By the said order, it was directed as follows:
“The respondents are directed to complete the departmental proceeding within a period of four months, as suggested by Mr. G.S. Bhattacharji, learned counsel appearing for the respondents. If there is any difficulty in respect of the Inquiry officer, the respondents would be at liberty to appoint a new Inquiry officer, but by any event the outer limit of four months shall not be allowed to expire for completion of the departmental proceeding. If the departmental proceeding is not completed within the period of that time, the departmental proceeding after expiry of that time shall be deemed as terminated and the petitioner be treated as discharged from the charges as stated above.”
Now these respondent-petitioners have submitted that though substantively the departmental proceeding is complete and the writ petitioner-respondent has been served with the copy of the report of the Inquiry Authority, the order proposing the penalty as well as the
report of the consultation with the Tripura
Public Service Commission but the writ

Noting by Officer or Serial Date Office notes, reports, orders or
Advocate No Proceedings with signature

BEFORE
THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE S. TALAPATRA
03.11.2017

Heard Mr. G.S. Bhattacharjee,
learned
counsel
appearing
for
the
respondent-petitioners as well as Mr. A.
Lodh, learned counsel appearing for the
writ petitioner-respondent.
This is a petition for extension of
time as framed by this court by its
judgment and order dated 29.06.2017.
By the said order, it was directed as
follows:

“The respondents are directed to
complete
the
departmental
proceeding within a period of four
months, as suggested by Mr. G.S.
Bhattacharji,
learned
counsel
appearing for the respondents. If
there is any difficulty in respect of
the
Inquiry
officer,
the
respondents would be at liberty to
appoint a new Inquiry officer, but
by any event the outer limit of four
months shall not be allowed to
expire
for
completion
of
the
departmental proceeding. If the
departmental proceeding is not
completed within the period of
that
time,
the
departmental
proceeding after expiry of that
time
shall
be
deemed
as
terminated and the petitioner be
treated as discharged from the
charges as stated above.”

Now these respondent-petitioners
have submitted that though substantively
the departmental proceeding is complete
and the writ petitioner-respondent has
been served with the copy of the report
of the Inquiry Authority, the order
proposing the penalty as well as the

report of the consultation with the Tripura

Public Service Commission but the writ

	IA No.1 of 2017 In W.P.(C) No.557 of 2017(D/O)
Noting by Officer or Serial Date Advocate No	Office notes, reports, orders or Proceedings with signature
	petitioner-respondent has not filed any representation as yet and therefore the respondents could not take any final decision in this regard and as such one month time is required for completing the entire matter. Having appreciated the premises in the context the time is extended till 31.12.2017 for passing the final order after exhausting the formalities which are required. Accordingly, this petition stands disposed of. It is made clear that no further time shall be granted in case of failure and the consequences as reflected in the order dated 29.06.2017 shall follow. JUDGE

IA No.1 of 2017
In W.P.(C) No.557 of 2017(D/O)

Noting by Officer or Serial Date
Advocate No

Office notes, reports, orders or
Proceedings with signature

petitioner-respondent has not filed any
representation as yet and therefore the
respondents could not take any final
decision in this regard and as such one
month time is required for completing the
entire matter. Having appreciated the
premises in the context the time is
extended till 31.12.2017 for passing the
final
order
after
exhausting
the
formalities which are required.
Accordingly, this petition stands
disposed of.
It is made clear that no further
time shall be granted in case of failure
and the consequences as reflected in the
order dated 29.06.2017 shall follow.
JUDGE

Bhaskar Dasgupta v. the State of Tripura and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Bhaskar Dasgupta v. the State of Tripura and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Manilal Malakar Vs T.K.V.I Board and Ors.

Hemendra Chakraborty Vs the State of Tripura and Ors.

Subhash Deb Roy Vs the State of Tripura and Ors.

Srabani Das Vs State of Tripura and 3 Ors.

Biswajit Ghosh Vs Kingshuk Ghosh

Rakhi Debnath Vs the State of Tripura and Anr.