The Court is of the considered opinion that State permission is required in order to bind the State with the financial responsibility for the appointments to the posts created pursuant to Government Order
The above was opined by the Calcutta High Court in the case of Sk. Bashiar Rahaman Vs. The State of West Bengal & Ors., WPA 2186 of 2016 was presided over by the Honourable Justice Hinranmay Bhattacharya on 23rd December 2022.
FACTS OF THE CASE
The writ petitioner has asked for inclusion as the West Bengal Office of the Board of Waqf’s Rent Collector, as well as permission for periodic promotions, incremental benefits, and retirement benefits, including pension.
The writ petitioner claims to have been hired as a rent collector in the office of the Official Mutawalli at some point in 1989 and is currently employed by the Direct Management Section of the Board in that capacity. With effect from April 1, 1997, the petitioner was granted the scale of salary of Rs. 3350–6325 by the board’s then-chief executive officer. The writ petitioner’s further claim is that the Board repeatedly asked the Government to hire him for the position of Rent Collector, but the Government never responded favourably. The Governor was pleased to sanction the creation of 52 more Board positions, including four jobs for rent collectors, during this time (LDA).
JUDGEMENT OF COURT
However, there is no dispute with the legal conclusion reached by the Honourable Supreme Court in B.N. Nagarajan which stated that nothing in Article 309 of the Indian Constitution limits the executive’s ability to act in accordance with Article 162 of the Indian Constitution without passing a law. The question in the current case, which was not raised in the aforementioned reported instance, is whether a person who has been appointed unlawfully can be made a regular employee. Because of this, the petitioner receives no benefit from the ruling in the B.N. Nagarajan, case.
The Court is of the considered opinion that State permission is required in order to bind the State with the financial responsibility for the appointments to the posts created pursuant to Government Order dated 11.04.2008.
For the aforementioned grounds, the Court is not disposed to provide the State of West Bengal any instructions regarding the employment of the writ petitioner in the position of Rent Collector under the Board of Waqf (West Bengal). As a result, the writ petition is unsuccessful and is dismissed without a cost order.
“PRIME LEGAL is a full-service law firm that has won a National Award and has more than 20 years of experience in an array of sectors and practice areas. Prime legal fall into the category of the best law firm, best lawyer, best family lawyer, best divorce lawyer, best divorce law firm, best criminal lawyer, best criminal law firm, best consumer lawyer, best civil lawyer.”
JUDGEMENT REVIEWED BY SAYANTANI RAKSHIT