IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA (CONSTITUTIONAL WRIT JURISDICTION)

APPELLATE SIDE Present:

The Hon’ble Justice Partha Sarathi Chatterjee WPA 11391 of 2024 Amulya Ratan Roy -Versus-

Union of India & Others For the Petitioner : Mr. A. K. Lahiri.

For the Respondents/UOI : Mr. Chirantan Dawn @ Dan.

Heard on : 18.03.2026 Judgment on : 18.03.2026 Partha Sarathi Chatterjee, J.:-

1. The short issue that falls for consideration in the present writ petition is whether, upon reinstatement in service consequent to the setting aside of the order of dismissal, the petitioner is entitled to full back wages along with other service-related benefits in accordance with the rules governing the establishment of the respondents.

2. The facts, as projected in the writ petition and necessary for effective adjudication thereof, are that, in 2007, while the petitioner was serving in the Central Reserve Police Force (for short, CRPF) as a Peon at its Group Centre, Durgapur, Burdwan, a disciplinary proceeding was initiated against him on the allegation of his involvement in a recruitment racket. It was alleged that, in connivance with two of his colleagues, he managed to procure the question paper of the written examination for the post of CT/GD scheduled to be held on 11.04.2007 and thereafter leaked the same. It was further alleged that certain documents, namely the original mark sheets and certificates of CT Ujjal Prasad and CT Prashant Roy, which had been handed over to him by SI(M) P.K. Roy, were recovered from his possession. According to the respondents, such conduct was unbecoming of a government servant.

3. Upon conclusion of the departmental enquiry, the petitioner was dismissed from service by an order dated 23rd June, 2009. Aggrieved thereby, the petitioner challenged the legality of the said order by filing a writ petition being WP No. 11585 (W) of 2009. The said writ petition was disposed of by a Co- ordinate Bench of this Court by an order dated 7th July, 2009, granting liberty to the petitioner to prefer a statutory appeal before the appellate authority against the order of dismissal.

4. The petitioner assailed the order dated 7th July, 2009 passed in WP No.

11585 (W) of 2009 by preferring an intra-court appeal, being MAT No. 727 of 2009. A Hon‟ble Division Bench of this Court, by its order dated 14th September, 2009, set aside the order of dismissal and remanded the matter to the Disciplinary Authority (for short, DA) with a direction to proceed afresh from the stage of inquiry.

5. Pursuant to the said order, the petitioner was reinstated in service on 17th September, 2009 and a fresh departmental inquiry was initiated against him. Upon conclusion of the said inquiry, the Disciplinary Authority once again held that the charges levelled against the petitioner stood proved and, accordingly, passed a second order of dismissal dated 8th April, 2010, thereby dismissing the petitioner from service for the second time. The petitioner preferred a statutory appeal against the order of dismissal; however, the same was decided against him. The petitioner filed a revisional application but the same was also dismissed.

6. In view of this, the petitioner filed another writ petition, W.P. no. 3412 (W) of

2011, which was disposed of by a Co-ordinate Bench of this Court by an order dated 24^th July, 2018 which rejected the inquiry report, order of dismissal, order of the appellant authority and order passed in revision. In addition, the petitioner was directed to be reinstated in service with all benefits, past and present, in accordance with law as if the dismissal never happened.

7. In compliance with the order dated 24.07.2018, the petitioner was reinstated in service with effect from 31st October, 2018 vide. an order dated 17.12.2018 issued by the Deputy Inspector General, Group Centre, CRPF, Durgapur. However, the quantum of pay and allowances payable to him for the intervening period between the date of his dismissal and the date of his reinstatement, that is, fr