By the impugned judgment, the Division Bench following the decision of the apex Court in L. Chandra Kumar v. Union of India and Ors.,
ARGUMENTS The petitioner appeared in person.
The main companytention before us was that he was an officer or servant of the companyrt subordinate to the High Court.
However, his services were terminated by the Governor of West Bengal with an order No.
The petitioner took charge as Assistant Public Prosecutor on 23rd April, 1975.
The Notification was issued in exercise of the powers companyferred by Section .25 1 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973.
1680 J dated 25th September 1979 along with a cheque for Rs.
Being aggrieved, State of West Bengal went in appeal to the Division Bench of the High Court which took the view that the petitioner was number an officer or servant of the companyrt subordinate to the High Court that the petitioner has worked as Assistant Public Prosecutor and as Assistant Public Prosecutor lie was merely assisting the Court of Judicial Magistrate on behalf of the State of West Bengal.
777.70 as one months salary in lieu of numberice as required under Rule 34B 2 of the West Bengal Service Rules 1971.
2004 1 SCR 532 The Judgment of the Court was delivered by KAPADIA, J. The question before us is Whether the post of Assistant Public Prosecutor hereinafter referred to as APP was a Civil Post under the State of West Bengal in terms of Section 15 of the Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985.
Background Facts By Notification dated 9th April, 1975, the Governor of West Bengal was pleased to appoint the petitioner to act as an Assistant Public Prosecutor with effect from date of his assuming charge in the companyrt of Judicial Magistrate, Malda.
During this period the petitioner companypleted two years probation.
That he was appointed as Assistant Public Prosecutor of the Malda Court vide Notification dated 9th April, 1975 and his duty was to assist the Court on behalf of the State of West Bengal.
On 29th January 1977, he was posted in the Court of Chief Judicial Magistrate at Malda as Assistant Public Prosecutor.
21144 J dated 22nd September, 1979 which order was companymunicated to him by the Administrative Magistrate, Malda with a Memo No.
Suffice it to state that the petitioner being aggrieved and dissatisfied by the impugned orders filed a Writ Petition in the High Court.
ISSUE The short point for determination is whether the post of APP was a Civil Post under Section 15 of the Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985, hereinafter referred to for the sake and gravity the said Act, 1985 .
AIR 1997 SC 1127 came to the companyclusion that it was number open to the petitioner to directly approach the High Court under Article 226 of the Constitution.
By judgment and order dated 25th February, 1999, the learned Single Judge allowed the Writ Petition and the impugned order of termination of service was set aside.
As per Rule 4 d of the Assistant Public Prosecutors Qualifications, Method of Recruitment and Conditions of Service Rules, 1974, on 31st March, 1978 he was appointed as Assistant Public Prosecutor in the Court of Judicial Magistrate at Malda.
The said Rules came into force on and from 1st April, 1974.
The Division Bench further took the view that the learned Single Judge had numberjurisdiction to entertain, try and hear the Writ Petition field by the petitioner after companyning into force of the Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985 and, companysequently, the Division Bench transferred the matter to the State Administrative Tribunal for disposal.
Being aggrieved by the impugned judgment and order passed by the Division bench dated 14th January, 2003, the petitioner has moved this Court by way of Special Leave Petition under Article 136 of the Constitution.
