IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA

CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

APPELLATE SIDE

Present:-

The Hon’ble Justice Madhuresh Prasad

And

The Hon’ble Justice Supratim Bhattacharya

W.P.S.T. 190 of 2025

Sudip Chanda

Versus

State of West Bengal and others

For the Petitioner : Mr. Bikash Ranjan Bhattacharyya, Sr. Adv

Mr. Soumya Majumdar, Sr. Adv

Mr. Bikram Banerjee Mr. Sudipta Dasgupta Ms. Sagarika Goswami

Mr. Arka Nandi

Ms. Sinjini Chakrabarti.

For the Respondents/ State : Mr. Kishore Datta, Advocate General

Mr. Swapan Banerjee

Ms. Sumita Shaw

Mr. Soumen Chatterjee.

For the Respondent Nos. 5 & 6 : Mr. Mrinal Kanti Mukherjee

Mr. Dipanjan Biswas.

Judgment on : September 24, 2025.

Madhuresh Prasad, J.:

1. The present writ petition arises out of an order dated 04.09.2025 passed by the

WOreigsitn Bale nAgpapl liAcdatmioinn iNstora. t3i2ve2 Tofr i2b0u2n5a la (loSnAgT wfoitrh s Mho.Art. )6 w7 hoef r2e0b2y5 t hane dp Met.iAti.o 8n2e ro’sf

2025 has been disposed of as being without any merit.

2. The brief factual background of the matter is that the petitioner was working as an Industrial Development Officer (IDO for short) posted in the Directorate of Micro, Small and Medium Enterprise (MSME) at the New Secretariat building in Kolkata.

3. The petitioner was General Secretary of the West Bengal Industrial Development Officer, Welfare Association. While performing his duties diligently, he claims to be taking up the welfare issues of the Government employees. He claims to be a leading personality pursuing the issue regarding grant of Dearness Allowance to employees in the State of West Bengal. He also participated in agitations and rDaelalirense csso nAdlluocwteadn cuen fdoerr t hteh ee mbapnlonyeere so fo f“ Sthaen gSrtaamtei. HJoeu athlsao Mclaainmchs at”o fhoarv eg emttaindge several complaints by way of representations regarding the present Head Assistant (Establishment) namely Satyajit Swarnakar (respondent No. 6). The representations were made alleging that the official actions of respondent No. 6 were politically motivated.

4. Sarkari The respondent No. 6 is the working President of “Paschimbanga Rajya Kasasromciaacthioanri hFaevdinerga ati odnif”f,e wrehnitc hp oalcitciocradl iindge otloo gtyh ea npdre hseanvitn wg raiftf iplieattiitoinon werit his tahne ruling political dispensation. It is the case of the present writ petitioner that on account of ideological rivalry association of respondent No. 6, btetween the petitioner’s association and the transfer from the Directorate (Heahde Qruesaprtoenrd) etnot a N Bol.o 6ck p Oroffpicoes eodf tthhee dpeeptiatriotmneern’st under the Block Development Officer Kalchini Development Block, Alipurduar. When such written proposal was made on 30.07.2024, the then Director put a note on the recommendation asking the respondent No. 6 to discuss the issue.

Photocopy of the recommendation containing the note of the then Director has been placed on record.

5. The respondent No. 6 pursued the present transfer as recommended, but without any success. Thereafter, authorpietiteitsi ocnoners’tsituted a committee of three Joint Directors vide Office Order dated 25.03.2025 issued under the signature of the Director, which was entrusted the responsibility for transfer and posting of all employees and officers under the Directorate of MSME. One Assistant Director, one IDO and one Head Assistant, namely the respondent No. 6 was attached with the Committee for rendering assistance to the committee. As soon as the respondent No. 6 was attached to the committee, the work of transfer was reallocated to another Joint Director by an order dated 08.04.2025 issued by the Director MSME Government of West Bengal.

6. Within a month from such reallocation, a transfer order dated 07.05.2025 was issued transferring 26 IDOs, including the present writ petitioner.

7. The writ petitioner is an officer holding a position (IDO) who normally is posted in the district head quarters. He is a Senior Officer of his department and was posted in the Head Quarters. By the impugned