ANUP KUMAR KUNDU versus SUDIP CHARAN CHAKRABORTY AND ORS.

ANUP KUMAR KUNDU versus SUDIP CHARAN CHAKRABORTY AND ORS.

The High Court was not justified in considering a new case not pleaded before the Tribunal, specifically regarding the appellant's appointment, and its judgment deserves to be set aside.

Source-derived case information.

Parties
Appellant: Anup Kumar Kundu; Respondent No. 1: Sudip Charan Chakraborty; Respondent: State of West Bengal; Respondent No. 9: Dr. Dilip Karmakar
Jurisdiction
India
Judgment Date
08 August 2006
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Appeal From Judgment and Order of Calcutta High Court Dated 30.10.2003, W.p.s.t. No. 675/2002
Outcome
Appeal allowed; High Court's judgment set aside.
Legal Topics
Appointment of Professor, Judicial Review of Administrative Decisions, Practice and Procedure
Service Law Appointment of Professor Judicial Review of Administrative Decisions Practice and Procedure

Source-derived case record

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Legal principles 2 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 7
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Anup Kumar Kundu

Appellant

Sudip Charan Chakraborty

Respondent No. 1

State of West Bengal

Respondent

Dr. Dilip Karmakar

Respondent No. 9

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Appeal From Judgment and Order of Calcutta High Court Dated 30.10.2003, W.p.s.t. No. 675/2002

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the High Court was justified in holding appellant's appointment as Professor illegal when there was no challenge to his appointment before the Tribunal
  2. 2 Whether the High Court could examine issues not raised before the Tribunal

Ratio Decidendi

The High Court was not justified in considering a new case not pleaded before the Tribunal, specifically regarding the appellant's appointment, and its judgment deserves to be set aside.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed; High Court's judgment set aside.

Orders

  • High Court's judgment set aside.
  • Appellant may move authorities regarding justifiability of continuance.