The period of limitation for disciplinary proceedings was suspended during the COVID-19 pandemic, as per the Supreme Court's order dated January 10, 2022, and the disciplinary authority had 90 days from February 28, 2022, to complete the proceedings.

JUDGMENT :

DEBANGSU BASAK, J.

1. An order dated September 12, 2022 passed by the West Bengal Administrative Tribunal is under challenge in the present writ petition.

2. The writ petition was filed at the behest of the State through a learned Advocate. Such learned Advocate appears in Court and submits that, he is not longer in the panel.

3. The private respondent is represented.

4. Learned Advocate appearing for the private respondent submits that, there is no illegality in the impugned order of the Tribunal warranting an interference under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. He submits that, a final order of dismissal of the private respondent was set aside by the learned Tribunal on the ground that, the disciplinary authority did not publish the final order within the time-period specified by the earlier order of the learned Tribunal. He draws the attention of the Court to the earlier order of the Tribunal dated August 5, 2021 passed in OA-494 of 2021. He submits that, such order in the earlier original application being OA-494 of 2021 was passed by consent of the parties. In support of such contention, he relies upon a portion of such order. He submits that, since the order was passed by consent, the question of enlarging time to comply with the order does not arise.

5. Learned Advocate appearing for the private respondent submits that, the suspension of the period of limitation granted by the Hon’ble Supreme Court on January 10, 2022 in Miscellaneous Application No.21 of 2022 in Suo Motu Writ Petition (C) No.3 of 2020 does not assist the disciplinary authority since it was limited to the Courts and Tribunals. A disciplinary authority cannot be construed to be either Court or a Tribunal. Moreover, the period of limitation was with regard to filing of proceedings before Courts or Tribunals. It did not deal with the period of limitation to be construed with regard to pendency of any proceedings.

6. Learned Advocate appearing for the private respondent relies upon 2021 SCC OnLine SC 610 (Neelima Srivastava vs. State of Uttar Pradesh and Others) submits that, a finality needs to be ascribed to every judicial order. The earlier order passed by the Tribunal attained finality. The time-period prescribed therein is final. The disciplinary authority did not act in terms of such final order. Therefore, the disciplinary authority lost its right to pass any final order of dismissal.

7. Learned Advocate appearing for the private respondent relies upon a decision of the Coordinate Bench dated May 8, 2023 passed in WP.ST 71 of 2023 ( The State of West Bengal and others vs. Shubhendu Bhattacharjya and another) and submits that, there also the Tribunal found the disciplinary proceedings not to be concluded within the time-frame prescribed.

8. By the impugned order, the learned Tribunal set aside the final order dated March 3, 2011 as well as March 31, 2022 passed against the private respondent in the disciplinary proceedings. Learned Tribunal took note of the order dated August 5, 2021 passed in OA-494 of 2021 which prescribed the time-limit for the purpose of conclusion of the disciplinary proceedings.

9. The order dated August 5, 2021 passed in OA-494 of 2021 required the Principal Secretary, Department of Finance (Revenue), Government of West Bengal to conclude the departmental proceedings and to take “a final decision by way of passing a reasoned and speaking order as per Rules and communicate the same within six months from the date of receipt of the order, in default, the proceedings should be vitiated”.

10. Apparently, the order dated August 5, 2021 was communicated by the private respondent by a letter dated August 6, 2021 and was received by the disciplinary authority on August 9, 2021. The final order was passed by the disciplinary authority on March 31, 2022 which is a period in excess of six months from the date of receipt of the order dated August 5, 2021.

11. Since the disciplinary authority received the order dated August 5, 2021 o