Calcutta High Court grants permission for a government doctor to resign, allowing candidacy in Lok Sabha 2024 elections, highlighting democratic principles. Dr. Pranat Tudu’s case from Jhargram Government Medical College initiates discussions on the balance between individual rights and public interest, referencing Clause 14 of the West Bengal Service Rules.
Thank you for reading this post, don't forget to subscribe!
KOLKATA,WEST BENGAL: Recently, The Calcutta High Court has made a landmark decision allowing a government-employed doctor to resign to contest in the 2024 Lok Sabha elections. Justice Rajasekhar Mantha emphasized that individuals aspiring to be public representatives inherently serve the public interest.
The case emerged, when Dr. Pranat Tudu, associated with the Jhargram Government Medical College and Hospital, decided to step into the political arena by contesting the Lok Sabha elections.
Despite submitting his resignation, the State government held back its acceptance, prompting Dr. Tudu to seek judicial intervention. The plea put forth by Dr. Tudu opened a discussion on the balance between individual rights and public interest, as defined under the West Bengal Service Rules.
The government’s position was based on a rule called Clause 14 in the West Bengal Service Rules. This rule says that if government employees, especially those who took study leave, want to resign, they must first repay the expenses of their study leave.
ALSO READ: Bar Council of India Proposes Key Reforms for ‘One Nation, One Election’
Justice Mantha noted:
“When it comes to prioritizing public interest under Clause 14, in addition to it being directive, this Court believes that when an individual aims to run for election as a public representative, they are essentially positioning themselves to represent the wider public. Hence, there is an inherent public interest in someone seeking candidacy in an election and aspiring to become a representative of the people.”
Moreover, when discussing the financial responsibilities associated with Clause 14, the court adopted a practical stance. It postponed the immediate requirement to resolve the financial matters, proposing that the determination of amounts under Clause 14 could be addressed later.
The court’s instruction was explicit:
“This Court orders the authorities to endorse the petitioner’s resignation within 48 hours of receiving any reimbursement from the petitioner as per Clause 14 of the Service Rules.”
With these observations, the court not only facilitated Dr. Tudu’s political aspirations but also set a precedent emphasizing the importance of political participation for individuals in public service roles. The ruling reflects a broader understanding of democracy and public interest, extending beyond the confines of traditional employment and service rules.
ALSO READ: Lok Sabha Passes Key Bill on Election Commission Appointments Amid Debate
Advocates Billwadal Bhattacharyya, Sayak Chakraborti, Anish Kumar Mukherjee, and Wrickbrata Roy appearing for Dr. Tudu, while Senior Advocate Amal Kumar Sen and Advocate Ashima Das (Sil) represented the State.
Case Title:
Dr Pranat Tudu vs State of West Bengal
