25.08.2026 Item No.22 Court No.12 (gc) MAT 1285 of 2026 CAN 1 of 2026 Saheb Bag Vs. The State of West Bengal & Ors. Mr. Sk. Toslim Ali, Mr. Sagnik Bhattacharya …for the Appellant. Mr. Niladri Saha …for the State. 1. The appeal arises out of an order dated July 10, 2026 passed in WPA 15047 of 2026. By the order impugned, the learned Single Judge dismissed the writ petition and imposed liability on the appellant to refund Rs.60,000/- to the Gram Panchayat on the ground that credit of an amount of Rs.60,000/- to the bank account of the appellant as an instalment towards “Banglar Bari Prakalpa” was erroneously done and one Saheb Pandit and not Saheb Bag was the actual beneficiary. 2. The learned Advocate for the appellant takes us to the beneficiary’s list and we find that his name is available at serial no.2025. 3. The learned Advocate for the State submits that the actual beneficiary was Saheb Pandit and the mistake was detected when it transpired that the 2 name of the appellant’s wife was Shampa Bag, but the name of Saheb Pandit’s wife was Palashi Pandit. 4. We are unable to understand why the Gram Panchayat made such enquiry and under what circumstances and provisions, such search was made on the basis of the wife’s name. 5. Her Lordship has not recorded any reason at all, as to how the respondents had satisfied the claim for refund of the money, on the ground that Saheb Pandit was actually entitled to the same. The Respondents have also not produced any beneficiary list which would indicate that the money was actually meant for Saheb Pandit and not Saheb Bag. There are no contemporaneous documents showing that the amount was not sanctioned in favour of the appellant, but Saheb Bag was the actual beneficiary. 6. Under such circumstances, the writ petition could not have been dismissed in limine. 7. The appeal is allowed. The order impugned is set aside. 8. Instead of remanding the matter to the writ court, we deem it fit to refer the matter to the concerned District Magistrate, who will ascertain the correctness of the claim of the Gram Panchayat. 3 9. While doing so, the District Magistrate will make an enquiry, hear the parties and pass a reasoned order. The order shall be communicated to the parties. The entire exercise will be completed within two months from the date of communication of the order. 10. Accordingly, the appeal and the connected application are disposed of. 11. However, there shall be no order as to costs. 12. Urgent Photostat certified copy of this order, if applied for, be supplied to the parties on usual undertaking. (Shampa Sarkar, J.) (Arjun Ray Mukherjee, J.)