JUDGMENT :

Amrita Sinha, J.

1. An application for review has been filed by the State of West Bengal through the Secretary, Department of Urban Development and Municipal Affairs seeking review of the order dated 21st April, 2023 passed by His Lordship the Hon’ble Justice Abhijit Gangopadhyay in CAN 02 of 2023 preferred by the Directorate of Enforcement in WPA No. 9979 of 2022 (Soumen Nandy vs. State of West Bengal & Ors.).

2. The said review application has been filed pursuant to the leave granted by the Hon’ble Supreme Court on 28th April, 2023 in petition for Special Leave to Appeal (C) No. 8706/2023 filed at the instance of the State of West Bengal challenging the order dated 21st April, 2023 passed in CAN No. 02 of 23 in WPA 9979 of 2022.

3. The order passed by the Hon’ble Supreme Court records the synopsis of the Special Leave Petition which reads as follows :

“9. That the impugned order records that none appears for the State despite notice, on contrary it is most respectfully submitted in the said application the applicant has not even arrayed Department of Urban Development and Municipal Affairs as a party, instead the applicant had randomly served Advocates associated with the Ld. Government Pleader’s Office, which was informed subsequently, instead of serving the concerned Advocates or the concerned Department for appropriate action. Such mischief by the counsels, ought to have been frowned upon, instead of being strengthened vide the impugned order herein.”

4. The Hon’ble Supreme Court observed that the High Court recorded in its order that none appeared on behalf of the State, though served; but a specific averment has been made in the SLP regarding non service upon the department of Urban Development and Municipal Affairs. The Hon’ble Supreme Court opined that in the interest of justice the State of West Bengal be heard afresh by the High Court on the issue whether the investigation should be initiated by the CBI.

5. The Hon’ble Supreme Court permitted the State to move a petition by way of review before the High Court and the High Court was directed to take a considered view after hearing the parties.

6. The learned senior counsel representing the petitioner before the Hon’ble Supreme Court submitted before the Court that review petition would be moved within three working days. The Hon’ble Supreme Court requested the High Court to dispose of the review petition within a week from the date of its filing and further directed that the CBI and Enforcement Directorate shall maintain the status quo for a period of a week. The Special Leave Petition stood disposed of.

7. Pursuant to the order passed by the Hon’ble Supreme Court, the writ petition stood assigned to this Bench by the Hon’ble the Acting Chief Justice of this Court on 1st May, 2023 and the cause papers of the case were forwarded to this Bench on 2nd May 2023. Leave was sought for by the review applicant on 4th May, 2023 to file the Memorandum of Review without a certified copy. Being made aware of the time line mentioned in the order passed by the Hon’ble Supreme Court, this Bench granted leave to file the same and the Memorandum of Review along with the connected application being CAN 1 of 2023 was filed on 4th May, 2023.

8. One of the grounds for filing the application for review, inter alia, is that the order under review was passed without jurisdiction. The Bench dealing with the matter did not have the jurisdiction to pass order on the application filed by the Enforcement Directorate to investigate any matter in connection with recruitment in the municipalities. The Bench in question was assigned the determination to decide matters relating to primary education under Group-II including applications connected thereto. As the Hon’ble Bench did not have any jurisdiction to take up matters relating to municipalities, accordingly, the Court could not have passed any direction to cause investigation in connection with recruitment in the municipalities. The order passe