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

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

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Direction to respondent no. 4 to consider the representation dated 16.09.2025 along with the legal notice dated 27.01.2026 within 60 days and pass a reasoned order in accordance with law upon affording opportunity of hearing to the petitioner, the private respondents and other stakeholders, communicating the decision within a week thereafter; liberty reserved to the State respondents to take appropriate steps forthwith in accordance with law if the private respondent remains unrepresented and fails to act on the reasoned decision.

Issue for consideration

Whether a direction should issue restraining the private respondent from plying its vehicle unauthorizedly on the inter-regional Habra-Keyageria route without any valid time table. +1 more

Court's answer

The Court found that the petitioner had made out a prima facie case for the ends of justice (sentence garbled in source; quoted verbatim).

Ratio / Principle

Respondent no. 4 was directed to consider the representation dated 16.09.2025 along with the legal notice dated 27.01.2026 within a period of 60 days and pass a reasoned order in accordance with law.

Key takeaways

The reasoned order is to be passed upon affording opportunity of hearing to the petitioner, the private respondents and other stakeholders, if any, and the decision is to be communicated within a week thereafter.ratio¶12
The writ petition WPA 3844 of 2026 was disposed of without going into the merits of the case.ratio¶13
It was made clear that if the private respondent remains unrepresented on the date of hearing and fails to act in terms of the reasoned decision taken by the authority, the State respondents are at liberty to take appropriate steps forthwith in accordance with law.

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Writ Petition (WPA 3844 of 2026), decided 02-04-2026 by Smita Das De, J. (Single Judge): The petitioner, holder of permanent stage carriage permit P.St.P. No. WB2023-SC0012A operating vehicle WB 31A/0441 as an Express Service on the intra-regional Habra-Digha route under a time table valid up to 15.01.2028, alleged a timing clash with the private respondent's permit P.St.P No. WB2024-SC0372A (vehicle WB 31A/1866) on the Habra-Keyageria route, particularly on the Down Trip over the Digha-Habra stretch. Despite a direction dated 16.09.2025 to the private respondent to file a clash-free time table, the petitioner's representation dated 16.10.2025 remained pending, a legal notice dated 27.01.2026 went unheeded, and the State's report dated 02.03.2026 confirmed no time table had been submitted. Finding a prima facie case, the Court directed respondent no. 4 to consider the representation dated 16.09.2025 with the legal notice dated 27.01.2026 within 60 days and pass a reasoned order in accordance with law after hearing the petitioner, the private respondents and other stakeholders, communicating the decision within a week thereafter. The writ petition was disposed of without going into the merits, with liberty to the State respondents to take appropriate steps forthwith if the private respondent remained unrepresented and failed to comply.

02-04-2026 ct no. 10 Sl. 8 RP

WPA 3844 of 2026 Snehasish Karan

- Versus-

State of West Bengal & Ors.

Mr. Baskar Nandi …for the petitioner Mr. Ziaul Islam, Mr. Bhaskar Chakraborty …for the State

Affidavit-of-service be kept on record.

None appears on behalf of the private respondents despite service made. Even in the second call today no accommodation is prayed for.

A copy of the report filed by the State respondent is kept on record.

The main grievance of the petitioner is that the petitioner is the holder of the permanent stage carriage permit being P.St.P. No. WB2023-SC0012A issued by the State Transport Authority, West Bengal and accordingly operating his vehicle bearing Registration No. WB 31A/0441 as “Express Service” on the intra-regional route “Habra to Digha via Ashoke Nagar, Dutta Pukur, Champadali, Duckbanglow, Madhyamgram, Belghoria Expressway, Dakshineswar, Bally Halt, Kona More, Dhulagarh, Ranihati, Kolaghat, Nandakumar, Henria, Contai, Ramnagar” on the basis of the a time table which is valid upto 15.01.2028.

2

The petitioner submits that there is a clash of timing between the time schedule allotted to the petitioner and the private respondent who is a holder of a permit being P.St.P No. WB2024-SC0372A in respect of vehicle No. WB 31A/1866 for the route Habra to Keyageria especially in the „Down Trip‟ on every point through the stretch of „Digha to Habra‟.

The petitioner raised an objection and the hearing was accordingly conducted on 16.09.2025 wherein the private respondent is directed to submit a clash-free time table at the earliest to resolve the issue involved herein as well as to validate the existing route permit.

Since the private respondents did not fail to act in terms of the order the petitioner has approached this Court praying for a direction to restrain the private respondent from plying the vehicle unauthorizedly in the inter-regional route from Habra to Keyageria without any valid time table.

The petitioner made a representation before the authority concerned on 16.10.2025. However, the same remains pending for consideration.

A further legal notice was also served upon the State respondent to stop the plying of the vehicle of the private respondent without a valid time table and to submit a clash free time table in due compliance to the decision dated 16.09.2025.

3

The learned Counsel appearing for the State respondent submits a report dated 02.03.2026 from which it appears that till date the time table has not been submitted before the authority concerned.

In view of the above, I find that petitioner has been plying to make to a prima facie case for the ends of justice.

I direct the respondent no. 4 to consider the representation dated 16.09.2025 along with the legal notice dated 27.01.2026 within a period of 60 days and pass a reasoned order in accordance with law upon affording opportunity of hearing to the petitioner, the private respondents and other stake holders, if any, and communicate such decision within a week thereafter.

The writ petition being WPA 3844 of 2026 is disposed of without going into the merits of the case.

However, it is made clear that if the private respondent remains unrepresented on the date of hearing and fails to act in terms of the reasoned decision taken by the authority concerned, the State respondents are at liberty to take appropriate steps forthwith in accordance with law.

(Smita Das De, J.)