25.07.2025 (D/L-19) Ct. No.4 (B.K.N.) W.P.S.T. 145 of 2025 Sri Abhijit Halder & Another Vs. The State of West Bengal & Others Mr. Sandip Srimani, Ms. Pratima Saha ...for the Petitioners Mr. Biswabrata Basu Mallick, Ld. AGP, Mr. Sayan Ganguly ...for the State Ms. Shraboni Sarkar, Ms. Umme Habiba Khatun ...for the Respondent Nos. 4, 5 & 6/PSC, W.B. 1. Heard learned advocate for the petitioners and the learned AGP appearing on behalf of the State. The learned PSC counsel is also appearing. 2. The petitioners have put to challenge an order dated 12.03.2025 passed by the West Bengal Administrative Tribunal (SAT) whereby due to unavailability of a Bench of two Members, the matter has been adjourned for hearing to 21.08.2025. He submits that the order be set aside and a direction be issue that the Tribunal take up the matter for consideration before a Single Bench. 3. The learned AGP points out from the brief that on an earlier occasion that is on 17.05.2023 a prayer had been made by the applicant before the Tribunal in the following terms: “Mrs. P. Saha, learned advocate for the applicants submits that since this is a matter of 2 appointment and since various points of law are involved, therefore, this matter be placed before a Bench comprising of two members (Judicial and Administrative). In response, both Mr. G.P. Banerjee, learned counsel for the State respondents and Mr. S. Bhattacharjee, learned counsel for the PSC, WB support this view point.” 4. It is on such prayer of the applicants that the matter was placed before a Bench of two Members and, therefore, there is no occasion to assail a subsequent order in the same proceedings adjourning the matter due to nonavailability of a Bench of two Members. 5. We are in agreement with such submission. We find that the petitioners cannot raise any grievance in this regard since it is as per his asking that the Tribunal has considered the matter to be placed before a Bench of two Members for adjudication. There is no occasion for the petitioners to raise any grievance keeping this in the background with respect to the order dated 12.03.2025 impugned in the present writ proceedings. 6. We leave it open to the writ petitioners/applicants to move an appropriate application before the Tribunal. 7. The writ petition is dismissed. (Madhuresh Prasad, J.) (Supratim Bhattacharya, J.)