THE LT.GOVERNOR AND ORS. SATISH CHANDRA MISHRA vs DHARAM RAJ — WP.CT/18/2026

Case under Article 226 of Constitution of India Section NA. Disposed: Contested--ALLOWED on 28th April 2026.

CNR: WBCHCP0003372026

CASE DISPOSED

Filing Number

WP.CT /18/2026

Filing Date

25-03-2026

Registration No

WP.CT /18/2026

Registration Date

25-03-2026

Judge

HON'BLE JUSTICE SABYASACHI BHATTACHARYYA , HON'BLE JUSTICE SMITA DAS DE

Coram

HON'BLE JUSTICE SABYASACHI BHATTACHARYYA , HON'BLE JUSTICE SMITA DAS DE

Bench Type

Division Bench

Category

GROUP A (WRIT MATTERS) ( 1 )

Sub-Category

Miscellaneous ( 16 )

Judicial Branch

Judicial Section

Decision Date

28th April 2026

Nature of Disposal

Contested--ALLOWED

Acts & Sections

ARTICLE 226 OF CONSTITUTION OF INDIA Section NA

Petitioner(s)

THE LT.GOVERNOR AND ORS. SATISH CHANDRA MISHRA

ANDAMAN AND NICOBAR ADMINISTRATION

THE CHIEF SECRETARY

THE SECRETARY (PERSONNEL)

Respondent(s)

DHARAM RAJ

Hearing History

Judge: HON'BLE JUSTICE SABYASACHI BHATTACHARYYA , HON'BLE JUSTICE SMITA DAS DE

13-04-2026

NEW MOTION

22-04-2026

TOP, AS ORDERED

21-04-2026

NEW MOTION

Orders

28-04-2026
HON'BLE JUSTICE SABYASACHI BHATTACHARYYA,HON'BLE JUSTICE SMITA DAS DE

Court Decision Summary The High Court at Calcutta (Port Blair Circuit Bench) reversed the Central Administrative Tribunal's decision, holding that the Chief Secretary had authority to impose dismissal punishment on the respondent employee. The court found that although the Secretary (Personnel) issued the charge memoranda, the Chief Secretary—being the actual appointing authority under constitutional Article 311(1)—could validly impose the dismissal penalty, and appeals lay to the Lieutenant Governor, preserving the employee's appellate rights. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

casestatus.in Summary

Court Decision Summary The High Court at Calcutta (Port Blair Circuit Bench) reversed the Central Administrative Tribunal's decision, holding that the Chief Secretary had authority to impose dismissal punishment on the respondent employee. The court found that although the Secretary (Personnel) issued the charge memoranda, the Chief Secretary—being the actual appointing authority under constitutional Article 311(1)—could validly impose the dismissal penalty, and appeals lay to the Lieutenant Governor, preserving the employee's appellate rights. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Browse Related Cases

Cases under same legislation

Explore other courts

Search Another Case