Research › Search › Judgment

Calcutta High Court · body

2026 DAILYLAW 13088 (CAL)

BAPPADITYA GHOSH & ORS v. STATE OF WEST BENGAL & ORS

WPA/21871/2019 · 2026-04-27

Bivas Pattanayak

body2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

06.05.2026 Sl. No.1 Ct. No.14 gd IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA CONSTITUTIONAL WRIT JURISDICTION APPELLATE SIDE WPA/21871/2019 BAPPADITYA GHOSH & ORS. VS STATE OF WEST BENGAL & ORS. IA NO: CAN/1/2020(Old No:CAN/4444/2020), CAN/2/2020, CAN/3/2021 (APPLICATIONS NOT IN FILE) Mr. Subir Sanyal, ld. Sr. Adv. Mr. Anindya Bose Ms. Cardina Roy Ms. Raina Das …for the Petitioners. Mr. Bhaskar Prasad Vaisya Mr. Pinaki Bhattacharya …for DPSC, North 24-Parganas. 1. The matter is appearing under the heading “To Be Mentioned”. 2. Inadvertent typographical error has crept into order dated 27th April, 2026 in paragraph 6 at page 2 in the fifth/sixth line, paragraph 11 at page 3 in the fourth/fifth/tenth/eleventh line and paragraph 12 at page 4 in the first/second line mentioning the words “petitioner Nos.3, 5, 13, 25, 27, 29, 30, 31, 47, 62, 63, 73, 75 and 78” instead of “petitioner Nos.3, 5, 13, 25, 27, 29, 30, 31, 39, 47, 62, 63, 73, 75 and 78”. 3. The words in paragraph 6 at page 2 in the fifth/sixth line, paragraph 11 at page 3 in the fourth/fifth/tenth/eleventh line and paragraph 12 at page 4 in the first/second line of the aforesaid order be read as “petitioner Nos.3, 5, 13, 25, 27, 29, 30, 31, 39, 47, 62, 63, 73, 75 and 78” instead of “petitioner Nos.3, 5, 13, 25, 27, 29, 30, 31, 47, 62, 63, 73, 75 and 78”. 4. The aforesaid order is modified to the above extent. 5. The other portion of the order shall remain unaltered. 6. This order shall form part of the order dated 27th April, 2026. (Bivas Pattanayak, J.) 2