Partly allowed

Dr Nilabja Sikdar v. Utpal Mahato and Anr.

Calcutta HC10 Jun 2022WPCRC/72/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Court recalled an interim order regarding the disposal of a writ petition regarding a recruitment process. The petitioner was directed to approach a higher appellate authority as the Court lacked the current determination to hear the matter.

What did the court decide?

Recall of order dated 18.01.2022 to the extent of disposal of the writ petition; petitioner directed to approach appropriate appellate authority.

Dr Nilabja Sikdar Vs Utpal Mahato and… — Constitutional and Fundamental Rights | Calcutta HC (2022)

¶1

10.06.2022 sayandeep Sl. No. 11 Ct. No. 05

¶2

WPCRC 72 of 2022 in WPA 11498 of 2020 with IA NO: CAN/2/2022

¶3

Dr. Nilabja Sikdar -Versus-

¶4

Utpal Mahato & Anr.

¶5

Mr. Reetobroto K. Mitra Mr. Priyankar Saha Mr. Hemant Tiwari

¶6

…… for the applicant Mr. Dhiraj Kumar Trivedi Ms. Susmita Saha Dutta Mr. Niladri Saha

¶7

..… for the alleged contemnors

¶8

In Re: WPCRC 72 of 2022

¶9

On the last occasion, i.e., 08.06.2022, learned counsel appearing for the alleged contemnors had been requested to comeback with his suggestion as to what would be the best course of action for balancing the interest of the petitioner.

¶10

Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that the writ petition is required to be heard. Counsel submits that the grounds taken for challenge to the recruitment process would still be valid and would hence have to be considered by the Court.

¶11

It should also be noted that counsel for the alleged contemnors takes a fair stand in submitting that if the writ petition succeeded, the petitioner would be entitled to the benefit claimed and further that none of the candidates who appeared in the selection process

¶12

¶13

have been recruited. Counsel submits that the recruitment process was without any infirmity.

¶14

After hearing counsel appearing for the parties, this Court is of the view that if the writ petition is to be heard, the order passed by this Court on 18^th January, 2022 should be recalled to the extent of disposing of the said writ petition based on the stand taken by the alleged contemnors. The order dated 18^th January, 2022 in WPA 11498 of 2020 is accordingly recalled to the extent of the last two paragraphs. The recall hence would only be restricted to the writ petition being disposed of in view of the position of the alleged contemnors/ISI. The other parts of the order shall remain unchanged.

¶15

WPCRC 72 of 2022 is disposed of in terms of this order.

¶16

In Re: WPA 11498 of 2020

¶17

Since this Court does not have determination to hear the writ petition, the petitioner shall be at liberty to mention the matter before the appropriate Bench.

¶18

(Moushumi Bhattacharya, J.)

Dr Nilabja Sikdar v. Utpal Mahato and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Dr Nilabja Sikdar v. Utpal Mahato and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Sk MD Yusuf Ali Vs State of West Bengal and Ors.

Bivas De Vs State of West Bengal and Ors.

Ashok Kumar Saha Vs State of West Bengal and Ors.

Supriya Ghosh Vs State of West Bengal and Ors.

Goutam Pramanik & Ors. Vs State of West Bengal & Ors.

Narayan Poddar & Anr. Vs State of West Bengal & Ors.