HIMADRI DE AND ORS. v. THE STATE OF WEST BENGAL AND ORS.
WP.ST/221/2024 · 2025-01-03
Madhuresh Prasad, Supratim Bhattacharya
body2025
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 45723 (CAL) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 45723 (CAL) · dailylaw.ai ]
Judgment text
Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
03.01.2025 (D/L-7) Ct. No.4 (B.K.N.)
W.P.S.T. 221 of 2024
Sri Himadri De, WBA&AS & Ors. Vs. The State of West Bengal & Ors.
Mr. Abdul Masood, Ms. Debanwita Pramanik, Mrs. Debapriya Ghosh
...for the Petitioners
Mr. Tapan Kr. Mukherjee, Ld. AGP,
Mrs. Sangeeta Roy
...for the State
Mr. Pratik Dhar, Sr. Adv.,
Mr. Ritwik Pattanayak,
Mr. M. N. Roy
...for the Respondent No. 6
Mr. S. Bhattacharjee ...for the Respondent No. 7
1. The present writ petition has been filed raising a grievance that the West Bengal Administrative Tribunal (State Administrative Tribunal) without considering the petitioners’ prayer for interim relief has fixed the next date on 6th February, 2025.
2. We find that earlier the petitioners had moved the Tribunal by filing an O.A. The O.A was numbered as O.A No. 1435 of 2009 and was finally disposed of. It is not in dispute that the matter had travelled up to this Court. The issue raised in the O.A was in respect of a notification dated 23rd September,
2009. It is the same notification in respect of which
2 the relief has been sought in the present O.A (O.A. 303 of 2024).
3. Since the same notification was subject matter of the earlier proceedings before the Tribunal arising out of O.A 1435 of 2009 and the same was finally decided, we do not find any infirmity in the fact that the Tribunal has not passed any interim orders without hearing the other side in respect of the present matter again raising an issue regarding the same notification dated 23rd September, 2009; in the year 2024.
4. Since the next date has been fixed on 6th February, 2025 we only observe that the Tribunal will proceed to dispose of the matter expeditiously without any undue adjournments or unnecessary delay. Any observation made in this order may not be deemed to be an expression of opinion on the merits of the matter pending before the Tribunal.
5. With such observations the writ petition is disposed of.
(Madhuresh Prasad, J.)
(Supratim Bhattacharya, J.)