WPA/28891/2024 of AMARNATH MANDAL Vs STATE OF WEST BENGAL AND ORS.

Form No.J(2) IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA CONSTITUTIONAL WRIT JURISDICTION APPELLATE SIDE Present : The Hon’ble Justice Raja Basu Chowdhury WPA 28310 of 2025 With WPA 28891 of 2024 With WPA 31085 of 2024 Amarnath Mandal Versus The State of West Bengal & Ors. For the petitioner : Mr. Sanjay Saha Mr. Lal Ratan Mondal Mr. Probal Sarkar Mr. Sk. Kiran Ms. Indrani Mukherjee For the State in : Mr. Suddhadev Adak WPA 28310 of 2025 For the State in : Mr. Santanu Kumar Mitra WPA 28891 of 2024 Mr. Subhabrata Das For the State in : Mr. Ansar Mondal WPA 31085 of 2024 Ms. Sreelekha Bhattacharya For the Municipality : Mr. Md Sarwar Jahan Mr. Sayantan Hazra Mr. Subrata Ghosh Ms. Shalini Sen Ms. Sahina Parvin Mr. Emrul Kayes Heard on : 11.03.2026 Judgment on : 11.03.2026 2 WPA 28310 of 2025 With WPA 28891 of 2024 With WPA 31085 of 2024 Raja Basu Chowdhury, J (Oral): 1. By consent of the parties, the three writ petitions, all f iled by the petitioner are taken up for consideration together. 2. The proceedings emanate from an order passed by the Ho n’ble Division Bench of this Court in a Public Interest Liti gation, being WPA (P) 13 of 2024 dated 18 th January, 2024, whereby the Hon’ble Division Bench of this Court taking note of the submissions of elected members of the Murshidabad Municipality and the allegation t hat despite a decision taken by the municipality in its meeting held on 12 th September, 2023 to investigate and conduct an enquiry wi th regard to certain tenders the same had not been concluded and tha t the respondents therein were in the process of compromising the issue, directed the Director of Local Bodies, Government of We st Bengal to appoint an officer who shall immediately conduct an en quiry into the matter and thereafter proceed to take action in accordance with law. 3. The records would reveal that in furtherance to the a bove, the Director of Local Bodies by a communication in writing dated 13 th December, 2024 had directed the Chairman, Murshidabad Municipality to initiate a disciplinary proceeding against certain employees including the petitioner herein, who at the relevant point of t ime was discharging his function as Sub-Assistant Engineer of the municipality. 4. In the interregnum, however, the Chairman of the mu nicipality had issued a show cause calling upon the petitioner to r espond as to why legal action shall not be taken against petitioner for the petitioner 3 WPA 28310 of 2025 With WPA 28891 of 2024 With WPA 31085 of 2024 having been involved in the illegalities and irregulariti es which resulted in loot of public money amounting to Rs.2,91,41,305.61. 5. Without responding to the aforesaid show cause, or waiti ng for the outcome thereof, the petitioner had approached thi s Court by way of a writ petition being WPA 28891of 2024, inter a lia, challenging the show cause notice dated 25th November, 2024. 6. Records would also reveal that in furtherance to the noti ce dated 13th December, 2024 issued by the Director of Local Bodies, the petitioner was placed under suspension vide memo dated 18 th December, 2024, issued by the Chairman of the said municipality. 7. Challenging the order of suspension, a writ petition, b eing WPA 31085 of 2024 was filed. Subsequently, on 27 th November, 2025 a notice was issued intimating that a disciplinary proceed ing has been initiated against the petitioner in terms of the West B engal Municipal Employees’ (Classification, Control, Appeal and Conduct) Rules, 2010 (hereinafter referred to as the “said rules”). Since, by such time, the petitioner had already reached the age of superannuatio n, challenging the aforesaid initiation of disciplinary proceeding post his superannuation on 30 th September, 2025, a writ petition being WPA 28310 of 2025 was filed. 8. Mr. Saha, learned advocate representing the petitioner has drawn attention of this Court to the said rules and would s ubmit that the said rules do not authorize initiation or continuation of disciplinary proceeding beyond the date of superannuation. In support of his af oresaid 4 WPA 28310 of 2025 With WPA 28891 of 2024 With WPA 31085 of 2024 contention he has placed reliance on the judgment deli vered by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Dev Prakash Tewari v. Uttar Pradesh Cooperative Institutional Service Board, Lucknow & Ors., reported in (2014) 7 SCC 260 . Reliance has also been placed on the judgment delivered by the Hon’ble Division Bench of this Court in the case of Dilip Kumar Banerjee v. State of West Bengal & Ors. , reported in 2024 SCC Online Cal. 11859. 9. Mr. Jahan, learned advocate representing the municipa lity would submit that this matter pertains to financial embezzl ement at the behest of the petitioner. A proceeding had been initiated on the basis of the directives issued by the Hon’ble Division Bench of this Court in a Public Interest Litigation in furtherance to the resolu tion dated 12 th September, 2023. According to him, the petitioner is in volved in the financial embezzlement and loot of public money. He would submit that criminal proceedings have also been initiated against th e petitioner and the same is being investigated by the CID at present. 10. Having heard the learned advocates appearing for the resp ective parties, I am of the view that the primary issue that r equires consideration is whether consequent upon the petitioner having superannuated from service i.e. on 30 th September, 2025, the municipality could have initiated any disciplinary procee ding on 27 th November, 2025. The same is important having regard to t he fact that 5 WPA 28310 of 2025 With WPA 28891 of 2024 With WPA 31085 of 2024 the master-servant relationship between the petitioner and the municipality came to an end by then. 11. Independent of the above, the petitioner has not only challenged the show-cause notice but also the order of suspension. In the instant case, the petitioner claims that the initiation of the disciplinary proceeding was on the basis of the notice dated 27 th November, 2025, however, in the instant case, the fact that the petition er was put under suspension in contemplation of disciplinary proceeding in furtherance to the memo issued by the Director of Local Bodies date d 13 th December, 2024 cannot be overlooked. 12. Be that as it may, to consider the above aspect it is nece ssary to consider the scope and powers of the disciplinary authorit y to put a delinquent under suspension. Rule 4 of the said rules pr ovide for the conditions for placing an employee under suspension. To mo refully appreciate the same, the relevant rule is extracted hereinbelow:- “Rule 4. Conditions for placing an employee under suspension. “(1) The appointing authority may place an employee under suspension,- (a) Where a disciplinary proceeding or departmental enqu iry against him is contemplated or is pending; or (b) Where in the opinion of the appointing authority, he ha s engaged himself in activities prejudicial to the interest of the Local Body or the State or the country; or (c) Where a case against him in respect of any criminal offence is under investigation or trial. 6 WPA 28310 of 2025 With WPA 28891 of 2024 With WPA 31085 of 2024 (2) The procedure, which is being followed for criminal c harges against a Government employee, may identically be followe d in case of a municipal employee. (3) A municipal employee who is placed under suspension or be deemed to be under suspension in the circumstances mentioned in sub rule (1) shall irrespective of the circumstances which lea d to, or resulted in suspension be entitled to subsistence allowanc e during the period of suspension. (4) An employee against whom a proceeding has been commenc ed on a criminal charge but who is not actually detained in custody (e.g. a person released on bail) may be placed under suspension under clause (c) of sub-rule (1) by an order made by the appointing authority. If the criminal charge is related to the officia l position of the employee or involves any moral turpitude on his part, suspension shall be ordered under this sub-rule, unless there are exceptional reasons for not adopting such a course. (5) An employee who is detained in custody for a period e xceeding forty eight hours under any law providing for preventive det ention or as a result of a proceeding either on a criminal charge or otherwise, shall be deemed to have been suspended, by an orde r of the appointing authority, with effect from the date of his detention and shall remain under suspension until further order s. An employee who is undergoing a sentence of imprisonment sh all also be dealt with in the same manner, pending, a decision o n the disciplinary action to be taken against him. (6) (i) Where a penalty of dismissal, removal or compulsory 'retirement from service imposed on an employee under suspension; or (ii) a disciplinary proceeding pending against an employee under suspension is set aside in appeal or on review under these r ules and the case is remitted for further enquiry or action or with any directions, the order of his suspension shall be deemed to have continued in force,- 7 WPA 28310 of 2025 With WPA 28891 of 2024 With WPA 31085 of 2024 (a) in the case where the penalty of dismissal, removal or compulsory retirement from service had been imposed, on and from the date of the order imposing such penalty, and (b) in the case where the disciplinary action was pending , on and from the date of order placing the employee under suspension, and in either case; the order of suspension shall remain in force until further orders. (7) Where a penalty of dismissal, removal or compulsory retirement from service imposed on a employee under suspension or a disciplinary proceeding pending against an employee u nder suspension is set aside or declared or rendered void in consequence of or by a decision of Court of Law and th e disciplinary authority, on a consideration of the circumsta nces of the case, decides to hold a further inquiry against the employee on the allegations on which the penalty was originally imposed or the disciplinary proceeding was originally started, the e mployee shall be deemed to have been placed under suspension by the appointing author with effect from the date on which th e order imposing the penalty of dismissal, removal compulsory retire ment from service was made or where the disciplinary proceeding pending, from the date on which the employee was originally placed under suspension An order of the suspension made or deemed to have been made under this sub-rule shall continue force until it is modifi ed or revoked by the authority competent to do so.” 13. Having regard to the above and since a departmental enquiry was contemplated against the petitioner at the relevant po int of time in furtherance to the notice issued by the Director of Local Bodies dated 13th December, 2024, the right of the municipality to pl ace the petitioner under suspension cannot be doubted. The suspen sion order has been passed by the Chairman of the municipality wh o is the 8 WPA 28310 of 2025 With WPA 28891 of 2024 With WPA 31085 of 2024 appointing authority as also the disciplinary authorit y and as such the order of suspension does not suffer from any illegali ty. On such ground, this Court is not inclined to interfere with the order of suspension dated 18th December, 2024. 14. Insofar as issuance of show case notice is concerned, the show cause was issued obviously in furtherance to the order pa ssed by the Hon’ble Division Bench of this Court. Going by the afo resaid although, the petitioner has attempted to make out a case that th e municipality had made up its mind, while issuing the show-cause, however, from the tenor of the same it is clear that the observations made in the show cause were only tentative and no conclusion had been reach ed at that stage. The petitioner was obliged to respond to the show cause. On such ground no interference is called for. 15. Coming back to the issue whether the disciplinary proceedin gs can be initiated or continued against the petitioner after the petitioner having reached the age of superannuation, I find that the rules do not expressly provide for the scope for initiation of discipli nary proceeding beyond the date of superannuation. Admittedly, in th is case, the petitioner had reached the age of superannuation thoug h at the relevant point of time he was kept under suspension. It i s also an admitted position that at that stage the municipality was only contemplating disciplinary proceeding and no disciplinary proceeding had actually been initiated. Initiation of disciplinar y proceeding was effected vide letter dated 27 th November, 2025. On 27 th November, 9 WPA 28310 of 2025 With WPA 28891 of 2024 With WPA 31085 of 2024 2025, the petitioner had already reached the age of superannuation and the master-servant relationship had snapped. On such ground and in absence of any rule authorizing initiation of disci plinary proceeding and in absence of any master-servant relationship which is the foundation for disciplining a delinquent employee, the initiation of proceeding after the date of superannuation becomes a non -starter. The judgment delivered in the case of Dev Prakash Tewari (supra) and in the case of Dilip Kumar Banerjee support the above proposition of law. This apart the disciplinary proceeding had been init iated by a person other than the disciplinary authority. Though M r. Jahan by placing the resolution adopted by the Board of Counci llors dated 16 th September 2025 would submit that the Executive Officer was empowered to initiate disciplinary proceeding against th e petitioner, however, having regard to the rules not conferring any p ower to delegate, I am of the view ordinarily delegation of such power was not possible. However, since such issue may not be a relevant consideration in the light of the observation made herei nabove, no decision is rendered thereon. 16. In the light of the above, the disciplinary proceeding i nitiated against the petitioner cannot be sustained and are declar ed to be non- starter and non est and consequentially quashed. All consequences shall follow. 10 WPA 28310 of 2025 With WPA 28891 of 2024 With WPA 31085 of 2024 17. The aforesaid order shall however not interfere wit h the rights of the municipality to proceed against the petitioner in t he criminal proceedings, especially when the disciplinary proceeding has b een declared to be non est on technical ground. 18. With the above observations and directions, the writ petit ion is disposed of. Urgent Photostat certified copy of this order, if applie d for, be made available to the parties upon compliance of requisite formalities. (Raja Basu Chowdhury, J.) SB A.R. (Court)