Ct.No.19 DL 15.07.2026 32 Saikat Mukherjee WPA/15416/2026 MOLLA ABDUL ODUD VS. STATE OF WEST BENGAL AND ORS. Mr. Susanta Kr. Rakshit, Adv. .…For the Petitioner Mr. Nilanjan Bhattacharjee, S.S.C. Ms. Jayita Dhar Chakraborty, Jr. Govt. Adv. Mr. Nilanjan Pal, Adv. Mr. Joy Ranjan Dhar, Adv. …For the Respondent-State Mr. Sanjay Saha, Adv. Mr. Raju Mondal, Adv. …For the Respondent Nos.5&6 [W.B.M.D.T.C.L.] 1. Affidavit-of-service as filed on behalf of the writ petitioners is taken on record. 2. The contending parties are represented by their respective learned counsel. 3. At the time of hearing, Mr. Rakshit, learned advocate appearing on behalf of the writ petitioner, at the very outset, took me to Page Nos.13-14 of the instant writ petition being copies of Memo dated 13.02.2026 and a representation dated 26.05.2026. It is submitted by Mr. Rakshit that on perusal of the Memo dated 13.2.2026 it would reveal that a lease deed for LTML of sand has been executed in favour of the writ petitioner on 13.01.2026 for a period of two years and the said deed was registered on 15.01.2026. Page 2 of 3 4. It is further submitted by Mr. Rakshit that under cover of the said Memo the Respondent No.4 authority requested the Respondent No.6 authority to make necessary arrangement for onboarding the requisite details in WBMDTCL portal in order to facilitate the present writ petition to submit requisition for excavation permits in the centralised portal of WBMDTCL. It is submitted that by way of a representation dated 26.05.2026 the writ petitioner approached the Respondent No.6 authority to issue requisite challan so as to enable him to start the mining operation but in vain. It is, thus, submitted by Mr. Rakshit that appropriate relief/reliefs may be granted to the writ petitioner in accordance with law. 5. Per contra, Mr. Saha, learned advocate, duly assisted by Mr. Mondal, learned advocate, appearing on behalf of the Respondent Nos.5 & 6 in his usual fairness submits before this Court that the Respondent No.6 may be directed to consider the representation dated 26.05.2026 in accordance with law and to take all consequential action forthwith in the event he finds sufficient merit in such representation. 6. Mr. Pal, learned advocate appearing on behalf of the Respondent-State adopts the argument of Mr. Saha. 7. In view of such, this Court directs the Respondent No.6 authority to consider the representation dated 26.05.2026 in accordance with law and after getting due opportunity of hearing to the petitioner shall pass a reasoned order positively within July 31, 2026, and shall forthwith communicate the same to the writ petitioner. 8. The time limit, as fixed by this Court, is peremptory and mandatory. 9. Before parting, it is made clear that while disposing of this petition this Court has not gone into the merits of the representation dated 26.05.2026 and thus, all points are kept open for adjudication by the Respondent No.6 authority. 10. It is further ordered that in the event while passing the reasoned order, the Respondent No.6 authority finds sufficient substance in the representation of the writ petitioner, he is directed to take all consequential action soon thereafter. 11. Liberty is given to the learned advocate-on-record to communicate the server copy of this order to the Respondent Nos.6 for his immediate compliance. 12. With the aforementioned observations and directions, the instant writ petition is disposed of. 13. Urgent Photostat certified copy of this order, if applied for, be given to the parties, on priority basis, upon compliance of all necessary formalities. (PARTHA SARATHI SEN, J.)