WPA 7587 of 2003 (CAN 3 of 2026) Prosanto Bhawal @ Bhawal--vs-Union of India 12..06.2026 ct.652, sl. 30 sk Dr. Madhusudan Saha Ray Mr. Debanjan Chatterjee …for the petitioner. 1. An application No. CAN 3 of 2026 is filed by the writ petitioner/applicant seeking recall of this Court’s order dated 13.5.2026 in WPA 7587 of 2003. 2. Learned advocate for the petitioner appears. He submits that due to miscommunication the learned counsel could not appear at the time of call on the said date, when the matter was directed to be dismissed for default. 3. It is submitted that for the unintentional default of the learned advocate, the litigant should not suffer. 4. Having heard the learned advocate for the petitioner and also perusing the materials on record including the writ petition, I find the reasons cited are insufficient and unsatisfactory particularly in view of the fact that the writ petition is an old pending matter of 2003 and may have been infructuous by this time. 5. Considering all the above, the application CAN 3 of 2026 is dismissed. (Rai Chattopadhyay, J.) 2