IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA (CONSTITUTIONAL WRIT JURISDICTION)

APPELLATE SIDE Present:

The Hon’ble Justice Partha Sarathi Chatterjee WPA 10918 of 2012 Supriya Chatterjee -Vs.-

Union of India & Ors.

For the Petitioner : Mr. Kedareswar Chakraborty, Mr. Saptarshi Chakraborty.

For the N. F. Railway : Mr. Pradip Kumar Das.

Heard on : 19.03.2025 Judgment on :02.04.2025 Partha Sarathi Chatterjee, J.:-

1. In questioning the justifiability and propriety of the award dated 16^th January 2012, passed by the learned Central Government Industrial Tribunal at Calcutta in Reference No. 31 of 2006, which declined to accept the petitioner’s claim for reinstatement with back wages, but directed the payment of compensation of Rs. 50,000/- within the specified period.

2. Prior to venturing into addressing the contentious issue raised in the present writ petition, it would be apt to allude to the key facts, as projected in the writ petition, which are as follows:

a) The petitioner was engaged as a substituted Emergency Peon attached to Divisional Railway Manager, Alipurduar Division Junction (DRM/APDJ) in a pay scale of Rs. 2550- 3200/-, along with other allowances under the applicable rules, by a letter vide No. E/283/29/EP/AP©/6 dated 25th February, 2005, issued by the Divisional Railway Manager (P), N.F. Railway, Alipurduar Junction (hereinafter referred to as Divisional Manager), based on the approval accorded by the General Manager (P), N.F. Railway, Maligaon, as per his letter dated 7^th February, 2005. He joined the service on 1^st March, 2005.

b) Upon the successful completion of 120 days' service, starting from 1^st March, 2005, the petitioner was granted 'temporary status' as per an office order dated 22^nd August, 2005, issued by the Divisional Manager. His service was further extended for a period of three months by another office order, also dated 22^nd August, 2005.

c) Smt. P. Babbar, the then Divisional Manager with whom the petitioner was attached, left Alipurduar on 24^th July, 2005 to avail herself of 33 days’ Ex-India Leave from 25^th July, 2005 to 26^th August, 2005. The petitioner was instructed to stay in her flat located at P.K. Road, New Delhi, and he complied with the instruction, staying there during the specified period. Prior to her departure from Alipurduar for the leave, the petitioner submitted an application dated

24^th August, 2005, expressing his willingness to discharge his duties wherever Smt. P. Babbar would be stationed.

d) Smt. Babbar was transferred to Mumbai as F.A. &

C.A.O/Con on 29^th August, 2005, but she did not return to Alipurduar to hand over the charge. Instead, she went directly to Mumbai. Following her instructions, the petitioner travelled to Mumbai on 3^rd September, 2005 and performed the duties assigned to him by Smt. Babbar on 4^th and 5th September, 2005.

e) However, on 6^th September, 2005, Smt. Babbar handed him a letter stating that, in July 2005, she had verbally counselled him to put in more effort in his work, hoping for an improvement on his part. She further stated that, since there was no indication of any effort towards improvement and his willingness to work hard and application of mind was deficient, his services were no longer required.

f) The petitioner claimed that, on 22^nd August, 2005, Smt.

Babbar had certified that his service was satisfactory. However, just a few days later, on 6^th September, 2005, the same person alleged that the petitioner had not made any effort to improve the quality of his work. The petitioner contended that this letter was issued solely to replace him with a person of her choice.

g) As a result of the unkind action taken by Smt. Babbar, as reflected in the letter dated 6^th September, 2005, the petitioner, who had already crossed the maximum age limit to secure a job elsewhere, became distressed and even fell ill, as would be evident from the medical certificates submitted by him. Subsequently, by a letter dated 28^th October, 2005, the petitioner’s services were terminated, effe