Brundaban Gaana Vs State of West Bengal and Ors. — Calcutta HC (2024) — LawSathi Research

Brundaban Gaana Vs State of West Bengal and Ors. — Calcutta HC (2024) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Direction upon respondent No. 2 to consider the petitioner's representation dated 18.03.2024 and dispose of it by a reasoned order, affording opportunity of hearing to the writ petitioner, the private respondents and any other interested persons; the exercise to conclude within four weeks from communication of the order, with the decision conveyed in writing within a week thereafter.

Issue for consideration

Whether the private respondents (respondent nos. 12 & 13) violated the conditions of their permit while plying their vehicles, as alleged by the petitioner. +1 more

Court's answer

Since no affidavit-in-opposition was called for in this case, all allegations made in the writ petition are deemed to have been denied by the concerned respondent.

Ratio / Principle

The writ petition is disposed of with a direction upon respondent No. 2 to consider the petitioner's latest representation dated 18.03.2024 and dispose of the same by dint of a reasoned order.

Key takeaways

In doing so, respondent No. 2 shall afford opportunity of hearing to the writ petitioner, the private respondents and any other interested person(s) as it may deem fit and proper.ratio¶15
The entire exercise shall be concluded within a period of four weeks from the date of communication of this order.ratio¶16
The decision shall be informed to the petitioner as well as the private respondents by dint of a written communication within a week thereafter.

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Writ petition WPA 17737 of 2024, order dated 16.8.2024, single judge Rai Chattopadhyay, J. Filed by Brundaban Gaana against the State of West Bengal & Ors, alleging violation of permit conditions by the private respondents (respondent nos. 12 & 13) while plying their vehicles. Counsel for the petitioner submitted that the permit covered plying from Bhubaneswar to Ghatal, whereas the vehicles were allegedly plied only up to Nandakumar; an earlier complaint dated 01.09.2022 had drawn punitive action in the form of a fine of Rs.1,00,000/-, subsequently modified to Rs.90,000/-. A fresh written representation dated 18.03.2024 had been submitted to respondent No. 4. Counsel for the private respondents contended that after remittance of the fine the permit conditions were being duly followed with no further infraction. A report filed by the Police Authorities was taken on record. Without calling for affidavit-in-opposition (all allegations deemed denied), the Court disposed of the petition, directing respondent No. 2 to consider the petitioner's representation dated 18.03.2024 and dispose of it by a reasoned order, affording opportunity of hearing to the writ petitioner, the private respondents and any other interested persons, concluding the exercise within four weeks from communication of the order and informing the decision in writing within a week thereafter. No statute or precedent was cited.

WPA 17737 of 2024

16.8.2024 Brundaban Gaana-vs- State of West Bengal & Ors ct.25, sl. 18 sk .

Mr. N.I.Khan Mr. A.K.Mukherjee …for the petitioner. Mr. Srijan Nayak Mr. Mrs. Riturparna Maitra …for the State. Mr. Arabinda Chatterjee Mr. B. K.Samanta …for the respondent nos. 12 & 13.

Affidavit of service filed by the petitioner is taken on record.

This writ petition has been filed with the grievance of the petitioner due to alleged violation of permit condition by the private respondents while plying their vehicles.

In this regard written representation dated 18.03.2024 has been submitted by the petitioner to the respondent No.4.

Mr. Khan, learned advocate appearing for the petitioner has submitted that instant occasion is not the first offence when the private respondents are flouting the permit condition. He has taken the Court to the annexed documents to show the permit was granted to the private respondents for plying vehicle from Bhubaneswar to Ghatal. Allegedly the respondents have been plying their

2

vehicles not in terms of the said permit and to Nandakumar only instead of Ghatal. Petitioner’s first complaint letter was submitted on 01.09.2022, pursuant to which necessary punitive action was taken against the respondents by directing them to remit fine amount to the tune of Rs.1,00,000/-, which was subsequently modified to the tune of Rs.90,000/-.

Mr. Chatterjee, learned advocate appearing for the private respondents has submitted that after remittance of such fine, his clients have been duly following the permit condition and plying the vehicle in accordance with the same. He submits that there has not been any infraction as regards the route alignment to be followed by the private respondents, as per the permit granted, since thereafter.

Mr. Nayak is appearing for the State. He has submitted a report in Court filed by the Police Authorities; let the same be taken on record.

Considering the nature of allegation made in this case and the facts and circumstances thereof, the writ petition is being disposed of with the direction upon the respondent No. 2, to consider the petitioner’s latest representation dated

3

18.03.2024 and dispose of the same by dint of a reasoned order.

In doing so, the respondent No. 2 shall afford opportunity of hearing to the writ petitioner and the private respondents and any other interested person/s as it may deem fit and proper.

The entire exercise as above shall be concluded within a period of four weeks from the date of communication, of this order.

The decision shall be informed to the petitioner as well as the private respondents by dint of a written communication, within a week thereafter.

Since no affidavit-in-opposition has been called for in this case, all allegations made in this writ petition are deemed to have been denied by the concerned respondent.

The writ petition No. WPA 17737 of 2024 is disposed of.

Urgent Photostat certified copy of this order, if applied for, be given to the parties upon compliance of all formalities.

(Rai Chattopadhyay, J.)