12 14.08. WPA 18696 of 2026 2026 Mukul Chandra Chatterjee Ct. No. 18 Vs. Ab The State of West Bengal and others. --------------- Mr. Susanta Pal, Ms. Chandrabali Roy. … for the petitioner. Ms. Ranjana Chatterjee, Mr. Kaustav Seal. … for the State. 1. The petitioner, an Assistant Sub-Inspector of Police, was subjected to a disciplinary proceeding, which held that the petitioner was guilty of misconduct by the order dated January 29, 2025. The punishment meted to the petitioner was reduction in the scale of pay. This reduction was equivalent to two increments of pay with future effect. 2. The petitioner had challenged this order of the disciplinary authority dated January 29, 2025 before the appellate authority. The appellate authority had modified the order of the disciplinary authority directing lowering the scale to reduction of one increment instead of two. 3. In the meanwhile, the petitioner had moved a criminal revision, which was the basis for the disciplinary proceeding of misconduct. In the criminal revision, this Court by a judgment and order dated January 9, 2026 decided that the alleged misconduct of the petitioner was nothing more than a civil dispute 2 between the petitioner and certain other persons, which is unconnected with his service. Thus, the criminal revision was dismissed as against the petitioner.

4. On the basis of this judgment and order of January 9, 2026, the petitioner had approached the appellate authority by way of a revision/review on February 2, 2026, inter alia, on the ground that on the same set of facts, the criminal revision allowed, dismissing the charges against the petitioner and, therefore, the same could not be sustained against the petitioner for a disciplinary proceeding. 5. As informed by Mr. Pal, learned Advocate appearing for the petitioner, the said revision/review before the appellate authority is still pending consideration. The petitioner has filed the instant writ petition seeking selfsame reliefs, which have been urged before the appellate authority. 6. Since the revision/review before the appellate authority is pending, it would not be proper to take up the matter at this stage. 7. The appellate authority is directed to dispose of the revision/review by September 30, 2026. If the finding is in favour of the petitioner, he shall be entitled to all statutory outstanding along with interest at the rate of 6% per annum. 8. With the afore-stated directions, the writ petition is 3 disposed of. 9. There shall, however, be no order as to costs. 10. All parties to act on a server copy of this order downloaded from the official website of this Hon’ble Court. (Reetobroto Kumar Mitra, J.)

12 14.08. WPA 18696 of 2026 2026 Mukul Chandra Chatterjee Ct. No. 18 Vs. Ab The State of West Bengal and others. --------------- Mr. Susanta Pal, Ms. Chandrabali Roy. … for the petitioner. Ms. Ranjana Chatterjee, Mr. Kaustav Seal. … for the State. 1. The petitioner, an Assistant Sub-Inspector of Police, was subjected to a disciplinary proceeding, which held that the petitioner was guilty of misconduct by the order dated January 29, 2025. The punishment meted to the petitioner was reduction in the scale of pay. This reduction was equivalent to two increments of pay with future effect. 2. The petitioner had challenged this order of the disciplinary authority dated January 29, 2025 before the appellate authority. The appellate authority had modified the order of the disciplinary authority directing lowering the scale to reduction of one increment instead of two. 3. In the meanwhile, the petitioner had moved a criminal revision, which was the basis for the disciplinary proceeding of misconduct. In the criminal revision, this Court by a judgment and order dated January 9, 2026 decided that the alleged misconduct of the petitioner was nothing more than a civil dispute 2 between the petitioner and certain other persons, which is unconnected with his service. Thus, the criminal revision was dismissed as against the petitioner.

4. On the basis of this judgment and order of January 9, 2026, the petitioner had approached the appellate authority by way of a revision/review on February 2, 2026, inter alia, on the ground that on the same set of facts, the criminal revision allowed, dismissing the charges against the petitioner and, therefore, the same could not be sustained against the petitioner for a disciplinary proceeding. 5. As informed by Mr. Pal, learned Advocate appearing for the petitioner, the said revision/review before the appellate authority is still pending consideration. The petitioner has filed the instant writ petition seeking selfsame reliefs, which have been urged before the appellate authority. 6. Since the revision/review before the appellate authority is pending, it would not be proper to take up the matter at this stage. 7. The appellate authority is directed to dispose of the revision/review by September 30, 2026. If the finding is in favour of the petitioner, he shall be entitled to all statutory outstanding along with interest at the rate of 6% per annum. 8. With the afore-stated directions, the writ petition is 3 disposed of. 9. There shall, however, be no order as to costs. 10. All parties to act on a server copy of this order downloaded from the official website of this Hon’ble Court. (Reetobroto Kumar Mitra, J.)