Disposed

Saraswati Mitra v. State of West Bengal and Ors.

Calcutta HC13 Jun 2023WPA/22628/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioner sought Induction as partner in deceased husband's firm and to run fair price shop individually. Court held partnership is contractual. W Petition disposed directing authorities to reconsider representation after hearing parties.

What did the court decide?

Direction to respondent Nos. 4 and 5 to dispose of representation dated 12th September, 2022 giving opportunity of hearing to petitioner and private respondent No. 6 within 60 days.

Saraswati Mitra Vs State of West Bengal and Ors. — Service and Employment | Calcutta HC (2023)

¶1

Form J(2) IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA CONSTITUTIONAL WRIT JURISDICTION Appellate Side

¶2

Present : The Hon’ble Justice Bibek Chaudhuri

¶3

WPA 22628 of 2022

¶4

Smt. Saraswati Mitra Vs.

¶5

The State of West Bengal & Ors.

¶6

Mr. Sadhan Kumar Halder

¶7

Mr. Ashok Kumarn Sarkar

..for the petitioner

Mr. Abhijit Basu

Mr. Arghya Kamal Das

..for the Respondent

Item No.22

Heard & Judgment on: 13.06.2023

¶14

Bibek Chaudhuri, J.

¶15

The case of the petitioner in short is that the petitioner is the wife of one Nimai Mitra, since deceased. The said Nimai Mitra constituted the partnership firm with Biswajit Kundu, respondent No.6 herein and used to run fair price shop obtaining licence from the

¶16

¶17

authority. After the death of Nimai Mitra his wife, the petitioner herein wants to be inducted as a partner in place of her husband. Hearing was conducted by the Sub-Divisional Controller and the private respondent No.6 clearly stated that he does not want to carry on the partnership business with the petitioner because the accounts of the partnership business has not been settled as yet.

¶18

In view of such circumstances, this Court cannot pass any order directing the Sub-Divisional Controller to induct the name of the petitioner in the partnership deed because a partnership business is a creature of contract between two and more persons to run a business in partnership. In the instant writ petition the petitioner has prayed for consideration of her representation dated 12^th September, 2022. If the dealership of fair price shop was issued in the name of the partnership firm, the present petitioner cannot be permitted to run the said fair price shop as an individual licensee. Considering such circumstances, this Court is of the view that the representation submitted by the petitioner on 12^th September, 2022 should be disposed of by the respondent Nos. 4 and 5 after giving opportunity to the petitioner and the private respondent No.6 of being heard.

¶19

In view of such circumstances, the instant writ petition is disposed of directing the respondent Nos. 4 and 5 to dispose of the representation dated 12^th September, 2022 giving opportunity to both

¶20

¶21

the petitioner and the private respondent No.6 of hearing within 60 days from the date of communication of the order.

¶22

(Bibek Chaudhuri, J.)

Saraswati Mitra v. State of West Bengal and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Saraswati Mitra 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

Atindra Nath Mondal Vs State of West Bengal and Ors.

Md. Javed Sarwar Vs State of West Bengal and Ors.

Ranajit Chatterjee and Anr. Vs Cesc Ltd. and Ors.

Chhobi Mallik Vs State of West Bengal & Ors.

Munna Sk. Vs the State of West Bengal and Ors.

Olisa Realty Pvt. Ltd. and Anr. Vs the Jute Commissioner, Ministry of Textile and Ors.