Nilmani Banerjee Vs State of West Bengal and Ors. — Calcutta HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

Nilmani Banerjee Vs State of West Bengal and Ors. — Calcutta HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

No relief to the appellant; costs of Rs. 5,100/- imposed on the appellant, payable to the office of the District Magistrate, Bankura; all connected pending applications stand dismissed.

Issue for consideration

Whether the petitioner had locus standi to maintain the writ petition challenging alleged mid-day meal irregularities, given that his ward was not a student of the school and he was connected only through the erstwhile managing committee. +2 more

Court's answer

The locus of the petitioner being seriously questionable, he could not have filed an application under Group-II of the classification Rules of this Court; his grievance, if any, could have been agitated at best in a PIL.

Ratio / Principle

No irregularities were found in the mid-day meal scheme of the school by the District Magistrate on enquiry, and the writ petition could not have been filed in the first place by the petitioner.

Key takeaways

The Single Bench should have imposed costs on the filing of such frivolous writ petition.ratio¶14
FMA 637 of 2025 stands dismissed with costs assessed at Rs. 5,100/- payable by the appellant to the office of the District Magistrate, Bankura, and all connected pending applications also stand dismissed.ratio¶15

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

F.M.A. 637 of 2025 (Division Bench: Rajasekhar Mantha, J. and Rai Chattopadhyay, J.; decision date 13-07-2026) — Appeal against the Single Bench judgment and order dated 3rd March, 2025 in WPA 979 of 2025, whereby a writ petition alleging irregularities in the mid-day meal scheme at Lodna Mankhamar Vivekananda Vidyamandir High School, Bankura was dismissed. Held: the petitioner's locus was seriously questionable — his ward was not a student of the school and he himself was nowhere connected with it, being part of the erstwhile managing committee — so he could not have filed an application under Group-II of the classification Rules of this Court, and his grievance, if any, could have been agitated at best in a PIL. On the petitioner's complaint, the District Magistrate, Bankura had caused an enquiry and passed an order on 19th December, 2024 finding no irregularities in the mid-day meal scheme; the writ petition could not have been filed in the first place, and the Single Bench should have imposed costs for the frivolous petition. The appeal was dismissed with costs of Rs. 5,100/- payable by the appellant to the office of the District Magistrate, Bankura; all connected pending applications were also dismissed.

13-07-2026 ct no. 13 Sl. 30 sp

F.M.A. 637 of 2025 Nilmani Banerjee

The State of West Bengal & Ors.

Mr. Sourav Prasanna Mukherjee.

…for the Appellant.

Mr. Sahasrangshu Bhattacharya, ld. A.G.P., Ms. Mary Datta.

..for the State.

The appeal is directed against judgment and order dated 3^rd March, 2025 passed by a Single Bench of this Court in WPA 979 of 2025.

In the writ petition the grievance expressed is that there were irregularities in the mid-day meal scheme implementation at the Lodna Mankhamar Vivekananda Vidyamandir High School, Bankura. The Single Bench dismissed the writ petition primarily on the ground that the petitioner’s ward was not a student of the school. The petitioner himself was nowhere connected with the school since he was part of the erstwhile managing committee of the school.

This Court notes that the locus of the petitioner being seriously questionable, he

2

could not have filed an application under Group-II of the classification Rules of this Court. The grievance of the petitioner, if any, could have been agitated at best in a PIL.

It, however, appears from the records that on the complaint of the petitioner, the District Magistrate, Bankura caused an enquiry and passed an order on 19^th December, 2024. No irregularities were found in the mid-day meal scheme of the school in question by the District Magistrate. The writ petition could not have been filed in the first place by the petitioner. The Single Bench should have imposed costs on the filing of such frivolous writ petition.

Hence, FMA 637 of 2025 shall stand dismissed with costs assessed at Rs. 5,100/payable by the appellant to the office of the District Magistrate, Bankura.

Consequently, all connected pending applications shall also stand dismissed.

All parties shall act on the server copy of this order duly downloaded from the official website of this Court.

(Rajasekhar Mantha, J.)

3

(Rai Chattopadhyay, J.)