Form No. J(2) In the High Court at Calcutta Constitutional Writ Jurisdiction Appellate Side Present: The Hon’ble Justice Sabyasachi Bhattacharyya And The Hon’ble Justice Supratim Bhattacharya WPLRT 129 of 2026 Jobeda Khatun Vs. State of West Bengal and others For the petitioners : Ms. Somashree Dey, Mr. Goutam Malik For the State : Mr. D.N. Ray, GP, Ms. Susmita Saha Dutta, AGP, Ms. Monalisa Das For the private respondent nos. 4 & 5 : Mr. Pinaki Dhole, Ms. Nilofar Begam, Mr. Rabindra Kr. Pathak, Ms. Srijita Noe Heard on : 14.07.2026 Judgment on : 14.07.2026 Sabyasachi Bhattacharyya, J.:- 1. Affidavit-of-service filed today be kept on record. 2. Learned counsel appearing for the writ petitioner submits that by the impugned order, the West Bengal Land Reforms and Tenancy 2 Tribunal directed expeditious disposal of the hearing in connection with a notice under Section 57 of the West Bengal Land Reforms Act, 1955 issued to the present petitioner. It is argued that the present petitioner was the erstwhile mutawalli of the concerned Waqf estate and, by a resolution dated September 17, 2019, confirmed on December 14, 2019, the petitioner was unlawfully removed from the said post, challenging which an appeal has been preferred and is pending before the Waqf Tribunal. 3. Learned counsel contends that suppressing such facts, the private respondents herein moved the original application before the West Bengal Land Reforms and Tenancy Tribunal seeking expeditious disposal of the hearing on the Section 57, 1955 Act notice. It is argued that the present petitioner ought to have been granted an opportunity by the Tribunal to file an objection to point out such facts. 4. Learned counsel appearing for the writ petitioner further submits that before the Waqf Tribunal, the writ petitioner has also taken out two applications, one for impleadment of the concerned Revenue Officer (Block Land & Land Reforms Officer) as a party and another for stay of proceedings in connection with the notice under Section 57 of the 1955 Act. It is argued that without such applications being disposed of by the Waqf Tribunal, the B.L. & L.R.O ought not to have been directed to expedite the disposal of the hearing arising out of the Section 57 notice. 3 5. Learned counsel appearing for the private respondents controverts the allegations and submits that the appeal has been kept pending before the Waqf Tribunal by the writ petitioner for over five years, since the year 2021. It is contended that mere pendency of the said appeal for an indefinite period cannot be a ground for the hearing on the notice under Section 57 of the 1955 Act to be stayed. 6. Upon hearing learned counsel for the parties, we find that by the impugned order, an innocuous direction has been given to the concerned B.L. & L.R.O to dispose of the proceeding in connection with the notice under Section 57 of the 1955 Act issued to the petitioner. 7. Apart from the fact that the Board of Waqf was represented before the West Bengal Land Reforms and Tenancy Tribunal when the impugned order was passed, nothing in the impugned order precludes the writ petitioner from seeking expeditious hearing of the writ petitioner’s application for stay and/or addition of party pending before the Waqf Tribunal and/or from raising all questions, both on law and fact, in support of her defence, on the strength of her erstwhile mutawalliship, before the B.L. & L.R.O in the hearing in connection with the notice under Section 57 of the 1955 Act. 8. As such, there is no scope for interference with the impugned order. 9. Accordingly, WPLRT 129 of 2026 is disposed of on contest without interfering with the impugned order dated February 03, 2026 passed by the First Bench, West Bengal Land Reforms and Tenancy Tribunal 4 in O.A. 1136 of 2025 (LRTT), but with liberty to all the parties to ventilate their grievances and raise their respective contentions at the hearing before the concerned B.L. & L.R.O as well as before the Waqf Tribunal in the appeal pending at the behest of the writ petitioner. 10. There will be no order as to costs. 11. Urgent certified copies of this order, if applied for, be made available to the parties upon compliance with the requisite formalities. (Sabyasachi Bhattacharyya, J.) I agree. (Supratim Bhattacharya, J.) AD-25 TN