Ct.No.19 D/L 22.07.2026 19 Saikat Mukherjee WPA/11304/2026 DIPAK KUMAR MITRA @ KHANRA VS. UNION OF INDIA AND ORS. Mr. Sk. Rejaul Alam, Adv. Mr. Subodh Ranjan Ray, Adv. …For the Writ Petitioner Mr. Bipul Kr. Mandal, Adv. Mr. Subit Mazumdar, Adv. …For the Union of India/ Railway Authority Mr. Nilanjan Bhattacharjee, Sr. Standing Counsel Ms. Jayita Dhar Chakraborty, Jr. Govt. Adv. Mr. Swapnamoy Sarkar, Adv. …For the Respondent-State 1. The writ petitioner, Railway authority and Respondent-State are represented by their respective learned counsel. 2. On behalf of the Railway authority an instruction dated 08.06.2026 is filed and the same is taken on record. Learned advocate appearing on behalf of the Railway authority undertakes to supply a copy of such instruction dated 08.06.2026 to the learned advocate for the writ petitioner positively in course of this day. 3. By filing the instant writ petition the writ petitioner has prayed for issuance of appropriate writ/writs against the respondent-authorities, more specifically against the Respondent Nos.1 to 3 authorities, commanding them to disburse compensation and/or other benefits on account of user of the writ petitioner’s land, particulars of which have been mentioned in paragraph-2 of the instant writ petition. 4. At the time of hearing, learned advocate appearing on behalf of the writ petitioner at the very outset draws attention of this Court to Page Nos.32 and 33 of the instant writ petition being a copy of the reasoned order dated 08.01.2013 as passed by the Respondent No.5 authority pursuant to an order dated 17.02.2012 as passed by a co-ordinate Bench of this Court in WPA 20884(w) of 2012 [Dipak Kumar Mitra (Khanra) vs. Union of India & Ors.]. It is submitted that on perusal of the said reasoned order dated 08.01.2013 it would reveal that the Respondent No.5 passed the said reasoned order recording the absence of the present writ petitioner, which is, however, contrary to the truth. 5. It is submitted that pursuant to the order dated 17.02.2012 as passed by this High Court the writ petitioner approached the Respondent No.5 authority and submitted all relevant documents in support of his claim and despite such fact that Respondent No.5 authority passed the said impugned reasoned order recording the absence of the writ petitioner and had taken a contrary decision which is not correct. 6. Learned advocate appearing on behalf of the Railway authority submits before this Court that from the instruction dated 08.06.2026 as filed today before this Court it would reveal that on physical verification of the disputed plot in question it reveals to the Respondent No.5 authority that no part of writ petitioner’s land was utilised for the Railway project and thus, the Respondent No.5 authority rightly came to a finding that nothing is due and payable to the writ petitioner on account of alleged acquisition. 7. On careful perusal of the entire materials as placed before this Court and after hearing the contending parties, this Court considers that in order to ventilate his grievance the writ petitioner deserves another opportunity. 8. In view of such, this Court while disposing the instant writ petition directs the Respondent No.3 authority to nominate a competent officer who will consider the grievance of the writ petitioner and before whom the writ petitioner will submit a fresh representation. Such nomination shall have to be made by the Respondent No.3 authority positively within 30 working days from the date of communication of the server copy of this order and the factum of such communication shall have to be communicated to the writ petitioner by the Respondent No.3 authority by Speed Post at the address of the writ petitioner as mentioned in the cause-title of the instant writ petition. 9. Upon such nomination, the writ petitioner shall submit a comprehensive representation positively within 30 working days thereafter and the said nominated officer of the Railway authority shall dispose of the said representation of the writ petitioner in accordance with law after giving due opportunity of hearing either to the writ petitioner and/or his legal representative and shall pass a reasoned order within 45 working days. 10. The time limits, as fixed by this Court, are peremptory and mandatory. 11. With the aforementioned observation and direction, the instant writ petition is disposed of. 12. Before parting with, it is, however, made clear that while disposing of the instant petition this Court has not gone into the merits of the instant writ petition and thus, all points are kept open for adjudication before the nominated officer as would be done by the Respondent No.3 authority as per order of this Court. 13. Learned advocate appearing for the Railway authority is hereby requested to communicate the server copy of this order to the Respondent Nos.3 authority forthwith, who is directed to act on the basis of the server copy of this order. 14. Since affidavits have not been called for, the pleadings as made in the instant writ petition are deemed to have been denied. 15. 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.)