Disposed

Rita Mahato v. State of West Bengal and Ors.

Calcutta HC6 Jul 2022WPA/16491/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Single judge disposed of a Constitutional Writ Petition where the petitioner was dissatisfied with the District Magistrate's factual findings in an enquiry, holding that the writ scope could not expand post-enquiry report. Petitioner allowed to pursue statutory remedies.

What did the court decide?

The writ petition was disposed of. Petitioner allowed to take steps in accordance with law to assail the report.

Rita Mahato Vs State of West Bengal… — Constitutional and Fundamental Rights | Calcutta HC (2022)

¶1

2 06.07.2022

¶2

sb Ct 23

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA CONSTITUTIONAL WRIT JURISDICTION APPELLATE SIDE

¶4

WPA 16491 of 2021

¶5

Rita Mahato

¶6

Vs.

¶7

The State of West Bengal & Ors.

¶8

Mr. Himadri Kumar Mahata, Mr. Ziaul Haque …. For the petitioner.

¶9

Mr. Biswabrata Basu Mallick, Mr. Sayan Ganguly … For the State.

¶10

After considering the materials on record, by an order dated 9^th February, 2022, I directed the learned District Magistrate, Purulia, to make an enquiry with regard to four points formulated in the said order. The learned District Magistrate, has personally held an enquiry. In course of enquiry, the petitioner and the private respondent were heard. Thereafter a report was prepared by the learned District Magistrate, Purulia, which was filed as part of an affidavit by the State respondents. A copy of the affidavit with the report contained therein was served on the petitioner. The petitioner is dissatisfied on the factual findings made by the learned District Magistrate. The petitioner intends to file an exception thereto. Even if the petitioner is permitted to file an exception it will be assertion and denial of certain facts on affidavits the correctness of which cannot be gone into while sitting in writ

¶11

¶12

jurisdiction. That apart and in any event when the writ petition was filed the same was based on certain statements forming the basis of the relief claimed therein. With the filing of the report new facts have emerged which cannot be assailed in this writ petition as framed. The scope of the writ petition as it stood at the time the writ petition was filed will be expanded many folds even if the main prayer remains unchanged. Even if the petitioner is allowed to file an exception or a supplementary affidavit, the writ petition as it stands cannot take within its ambit the changed scenario that has arisen after the filing of the enquiry report by the learned District Magistrate.

¶13

The writ petition is, therefor, disposed of without any further order. The petitioner shall be at liberty to take such steps in accordance with law as may be advised to assail the report by taking all grounds available including the relevant ones contained in the writ petition.

¶14

(Arindam Mukherjee, J.)

Rita Mahato v. State of West Bengal and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Rita Mahato 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

Shankar Dayal Poddar Vs Union of India and Ors.

Bansh Bahadur Yadav @ Bans Bahadur Yadav Vs Coal Fields Limited and Ors.

Nandalal Daira Vs the Durgapur Project Ltd. and Ors.

Chapala Kora Vs M/S Eastern Cola Fields Ltd. and Ors.

Sri Bikky Vs C.E.S.C. Ltd. and Anr.

Sanati Hansda and Ors. Vs State of West Bengal and Ors.