SURATH CHANDRA CHAKRABARTY versus STATE OF WEST BENGAL

Citation: [1971] 3 S.C.R. 1 · Decided: 14-12-1970 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: J.C. SHAH · Disposal: Appeal(s) allowed

Cited by 2 judgment(s) · see the full citation network in Lexace

Judgment (excerpt)

A 
.8 
c 
D 
E 
F 
G 
H 
SURA TH CHANDRA CHAKRABARTY 
v. 
STATE OF WEST BENGAL 
December 14, 1970 
[J. C. SHAH, K. ·s. HEGDE AND A. N. GROVER, JJ.] 
I 
Civil Service (Classification, Control & Appeal) Rules, F.R. 55-Rult 
reqtfires in mandatory manner that particulars of allegations should be 
;upplied to. person charged-If particulars not supplied charge remains 
vague and official is denied reasonable opportunity to defend himself. 
The appellant. filed a suit in the Calcutta High Court challenging his. 
removal, after a departmental enquiry, from the post of Assistant Director 
of Fire Services and Regional Officer Calcutta Industrial Arca. The suit 
was decreed in his favour by the Civil Judge but the Division B~ch reversed 
the decree. In appeal to this Court, by certificate the question 
was 
whether the appellant had been denied a reasonable opportunity to defend 
himself inasmuch as the charges were vague and no statement of allega-
tions as required by Fundamental Rule 55 of the Central Service (Classi-
fication Control & Appeal) Rules was furnished to him. 
HELD : The appeal must be allowed : 
The 'appellant repeatedly and at ever ystage brought to the notice of 
the authorities concerned that he had not been supplied the statement of 
allegations and that the charges were extremely vague and indefinite. In 
spite of this he was not informed of the facts and circumstances and 
particulars relevant to the charges. The entire proceedings showed a 
complete disregard of Fundamental Rule 55 in so far as it lays down in an 
almost mandatory manner that the charges must be accompanied by a 
statement of allegations. There could be no doubt that the appellant was. 
denied a proper and reasonable chance to defend himself by reason of 
the charges being altogether vague and indefinite and the statement of alle· 
gallons containing the material facts and particulars not having been sup· 
piled to him. I. 6 H; 7 D] 
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION : Civil Appeal No. 1258 of 
1966. 
Appeal from the judgment and order dated September 16, 1965 
of the Calcutta High Court in First Appeal No. 146 of 1960. 
C. B. Agarwala, P. K. Chakravart;v, Prodyo~ Ktfmar Chakra-
varty and Uma Mehta, for the appellant. 
B. Sen, S. P. Mitra, S. N. Mukherjee, G, S. Chatterjee for 
Sukumar Basu, for the respondent. 
The Judgment of the Court was delivered by 
Grover, J.-This is an appeal by certificate from a judg-
ment of a Division Bench of the Calcutta High Court reversing 
the judgment and decree of a learned Single Judge made in exer-
cise of original jurisdiction in a suit filed by the appellant. 
SUPREME COURT REPORTS 
[1971]3 S.C.R. 
The record of the case is voluminous and apparently that 
led to very lengthy judgments both by the Single Judge and the 
Dilvision Bench. 
A host of facts have been introduced out of 
which it is necessary to state only those which are relevant for 
the purpose of the disposal of the points before us. The appel-
lant was appointed Station Officer in the Bengal Fire Service in 
1943. 
In March 1949 he was appointed to act as Assistant 
Director of Fire Services and Regional Officer, Calcutta Industrial 
Area until further orders. S. Bose, who was appointed Director 
-Of Fire Service on or abont the same date, received some com-
plaints against the appellant. He made certain preliminary en-
quiries. In the beginning of May 1949 Bose informed the appel-
lant that the post of Assistant Director Fire Service would be 
treated as abolished with effect from the date of the appoill.tment 
·Of the appellant as Assistant Director. This led to protests by 
the appellant against the abolition of that post. A lot of acri-
monious dialogue started between Bose and the appellant; the 
fonner made his final report to S. K. Gupta, Secretary Local 
Self Government, as to the charges which were to be preferred 
against the appellant. On July 12, 1949 the appellant was sus-
pended. 
On July 19, 1949 a communication containing the· 
charges against the appellant was sent to him by S. K. Gupta, 
Secretary Local Self Government. It is necessary to reproduce 
it in extenso :-
"Charges. 
Whereas !t has been made to appear to the Government of 
West Bengal"'-
A 
B 
c 
D 
E 
( 1) that you, 
Sri S. C. Chakravarty, 
Regiona1 
F 
Officer, Calcutta Industrial Area, West Bengal 
Fire Service incited the subordinate staff of the 
said service by circulating false rumours regard-
ing the retrenchment policy of the Government, 
thereby spre

Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.