Disposed

Md. Sanuar Hossain v. State of West Bengal and Ors.

Calcutta HC7 Dec 2021WPA(P)/321/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In this writ petition, the petitioner alleged corruption in the procurement process by a Gram Panchayat. The Supreme Court directed the District Magistrate to examine the representation, give a hearing, and return a decision within three months.

What did the court decide?

Direction to the District Magistrate, Murshidabad to examine allegations, afford hearing, and decide within three months.

Md. Sanuar Hossain Vs State of West Bengal and Ors. — Writ and Judicial Review | Calcutta HC (2021)

¶1

December 7, 2021 Item No.13 Court No.1 SG/s.biswas

WPA (P) 321 of 2021

Md. Sanuar Hossain

vs.

The State of West Bengal and others

¶6

(Through Video Conference)

¶7

Mr. Rabiul Islam, Ms. Pramita Banerjee, Mr. S. A. Munshi, Advocates

¶8

..for the Petitioner

¶9

Mr. Jaharlal De, Mr. Shamim Ul Bari, Advocates

¶10

..for the State

¶11

Mr. Atarup Banerjee, Mr. Md. G. N. Imruhi, Ms. Saswati Adhikary, Advocates

¶12

..for the respondents

¶13

The grievance raised in the petition is that the contracts have been awarded to the near relative of the Pradhan of Islampur Chak Gram Panchayat and the submission of learned counsel for the petitioner is that the work orders have been issued to the husband of the Pradhan violating the procedure and the rules and the money has been misappropriated.

¶14

When the matter is taken up today, learned counsel for the petitioner has pointed out that a detailed representation in this regard dated 27.09.2021 has already been submitted to the respondent No.2, the District Magistrate, Murshidabad but no action on the said representation is taken.

¶15

Learned counsel for the private respondents has disputed the allegations made in the petition.

¶16

Learned counsel for the State as also private respondents have no objection, if the above representation is duly examined and considered by the respondent No.2.

¶17

Having examined the record, we find that the issue which the petitioner has raised requires factual examination and

¶18

¶19

WPA (P) 321 of 2021

¶20

consideration of the record for which the respondent No.2 is an appropriate authority.

¶21

Having regard to the stand of the petitioner and the respondents before this Court, we deem it proper to dispose of the present petition by issuing a direction to the respondent No.2, District Magistrate, Murshidabad to duly examine the allegations made in the complaint dated 27.09.2021 by giving an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner as also the private respondents and take an appropriate decision in accordance with law.

¶22

Let this exercise be completed by the District Magistrate, Murshidabad within a period of three months from the date of receipt of the certified copy of this order.

¶23

The petition is accordingly disposed of.

¶24

Urgent photostat certified copy of this order, if applied for, be supplied to the parties on usual undertaking.

¶25

[Prakash Shrivastava, C.J.]

¶26

[Rajarshi Bharadwaj, J.]

Md. Sanuar Hossain v. State of West Bengal and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Md. Sanuar Hossain v. State of West Bengal and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

M/S. Msc Agency (India) Private Limited and Anr. Vs Union of India and Ors.

Abbas Banu Alias Banarasi Vs Cesc Limited and Others

dr. sonali gopalrao badhe Vs Union of India

Anupam Sirkar Vs Union of India & Ors.

Sabyasachi Mondal Adn Anr. Vs State of West Bengal and Ors.

Omega Transmission Pvt. Ltd. Vs Canara Bank and Ors.