Disposed

Narayan Maity and Ors. v. State of West Bengal and Ors.

Calcutta HC8 May 2026WPA(P)/216/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court disposed of the writ petition admitting a fresh comprehensive representation from petitioners to respondent authority, directing a hearing and a reasoned order within 90 working days, while explicitly reserving merits for later adjudication.

What did the court decide?

Petitioners directed to submit fresh comprehensive representation; authority ordered to hold hearing and pass reasoned order within 90 working days.

Narayan Maity and Ors. Vs State of West… — Civil Procedure and Limitation | Calcutta HC (2026)

¶1

May 8, 2026 Sl. No.10 Court No.1 s.biswas

¶2

WPA(P) 216 of 2026

¶3

Narayan Maity and others

¶4

vs.

¶5

The State of West Bengal and others

¶6

Mr. Dilip Kr. Sinha Ms. Tithi Paul

¶7

... for the petitioners

¶8

Mr. Robiul Islam Mr. Shamim Ul Bari Mr. K. M. Hossain Mr. Soumitra Das

¶9

... for the private respondent nos.8 & 9

¶10

Dictated by Partha Sarathi Sen, J.

¶11

The affidavit of service as filed today on behalf of the petitioners is taken on record.

¶12

The petitioners and the private respondents are represented by their respective learned counsel. None appears on behalf of the respondent State, despite service.

¶13

At the time of hearing, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the writ petitioners at the very outset draws our attention to page nos.26 to 28 of the instant writ petition being a copy of the representation dated 16.06.2023, as submitted with the

¶14

¶15

respondent no.4 authority wherein it has been asserted that one wooden bridge approaching the nearest cremation ground has been removed and/or dismantled causing serious prejudice to the local villagers.

¶16

It is further submitted that in the selfsame representation, it has also been alleged that the approach road to the said cremation ground has also been damaged by way of creating some big holes.

¶17

It is further submitted that from page no.39 of the instant writ petition being a copy of notice dated 22.06.2023, it would reveal that a meeting was called for by the respondent no.4 authority. However, since then no action has been taken by the respondent no.4 authority pursuant to the aforementioned representation.

¶18

In view of submission made on behalf of the writ petitioners and on careful consideration of the entire materials as placed before us, we are disposing of the instant writ petition by permitting the

¶19

¶20

instant writ petitioners to submit a fresh comprehensive representation along with server copy of this order upon the respondent no.4 authority.

¶21

The respondent no.4 authority on receipt of such comprehensive representation along with a server copy of this order, shall give a chance of hearing to the writ petitioners, the private respondents and the other stake holders and shall pass a reasoned order thereafter and shall forthwith communicate the same to the writ petitioners and the other stake holders.

¶22

The time limit for passing such reasoned order is 90 working days from the date of submission of the comprehensive representation of the writ petitioners and such time limit is peremptory and mandatory.

¶23

Before parting with, it is however made clear that while disposing of the instant writ petition, we have not gone into the merits of the instant writ petition as well

¶24

¶25

as the representation as submitted with the respondent authorities and thus, all points are kept open for adjudication by the respondent no.4 authority.

¶26

10.It is further directed that while passing

¶27

the reasoned order in the event the respondent authority finds sufficient justification in the representation of the writ petitioners, he is directed to take consequently action forthwith.

¶28

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

¶29

(Sujoy Paul, C.J.)

¶30

(Partha Sarathi Sen, J.)

Narayan Maity and Ors. v. State of West Bengal and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Narayan Maity and Ors. 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

Madhailal Acharya Vs Asim Kumar Paul

Binapani Das Vs R. Ranjit

Megacity Viniog Pvt. Ltd. Vs Heilgers Pvt. Ltd.

Union of India and Ors. Vs Debasish Biswas and Ors.

Birendranath Singh Vs Sanjiv Kumar Secretary Ministery of Defence Deptt of Defence Production and Ors.

All Bengal Blind Teachers Association and Anr. Vs Union of India and Ors.