02.09.2026 Item No. 24. Court No.22. AB W.P.A. 27750 of 2025 Sandip Karforma Vs The State of West Bengal & Others Mr. Saikat Chatterjee, Mr. Istayak Ahamed ….for the Petitioner. Mr. Samitendra Narayan Dutta, Ms. Rupsa Sreemani …….for the Respondents. 1. The petitioner is represented. 2. The respondents are also represented. 3. On the prayer of the learned advocate representing the petitioner, the petitioner is permitted to add the Superintendent of Excise, Birbhum as respondent no.4 in the writ petition. 4. Let such incorporation be carried out today itself. 5. Learned advocate representing the petitioner files an affidavit of service. Let the same be kept with the records. 6. The petitioner has filed the present writ petition praying for a Writ of Mandamus directing the respondent authority to allow his application dated January 22, 2024, by granting “bar cum restaurant” licence in favour of the petitioner. 7. Learned advocate for the petitioner submits that the petitioner had made an application for the grant of a bar cum restaurant licence on July 5, 2 2020 in Birbhum. By an order dated November 12, 2020, the Collector of Excise, Birbhum informed the petitioner that the aforesaid application filed by the petitioner had been rejected by the Inquiring Officer, DEC, Rampurhat Range due to public agitation. It was also stated in such letter that the aforesaid application was rejected due to non recommendation of the Inquiring Officer on the ground of public agitation in terms of Rule 9C(b) of the West Bengal Excise (Selection of New Sites and Grant of License for Retail Sale of Liquor and Certain Other Intoxicants” ) Rules, 2003. 8. Subsequently, the petitioner has come to learn that the said people who had agitated have stated in writing that they were misled at the time of the aforesaid agitation and have now expressed their consent in writing to the setting up of the restaurant cum bar by the petitioner at the concerned location. In view of the same, the petitioner filed WPA 4404 of 2021 before this Court praying for appropriate reliefs. 9. By an order dated November 28, 2023, the aforesaid writ petition was disposed of by directing the respondent authorities to reconsider the issue of the petitioner’s application for obtaining excise licence upon a fresh 3 consideration of the documents sought to be relied on by the petitioner. 10. Thereafter, in purported compliance with the aforesaid order dated November 28, 2023, by an order dated December 14, 2023, the Additional District Magistrate (G) & Collector of Excise, Birbhum allowed the petitioner to apply afresh at the proposed site for restaurant cum bar licence as per extant Rules. 11. Accordingly, the petitioner filed a fresh application dated January 22, 2024 before the Superintendent of Excise of Birbhum praying for a Letter of Intent for restaurant cum bar at the said site. The petitioner’s grievance is that such application is still pending. Accordingly, by his Advocate’s letter dated February 24, 2025, addressed to, inter alia, the Superintendent of Excise, Birbhum, the petitioner prayed for an effective compliance of the aforesaid order dated November 28, 2023, passed by this Court. 12. By a letter dated March 6, 2025, the Superintendent of Excise, Birbhum replied to the aforesaid letter dated February 24, 2025 and informed the learned advocate of the petitioner that after necessary verification, the proposal of the petitioner has been forwarded to the Excise Directorate on July 5, 2024. Learned Advocate for 4 the petitioner contends that it will be evident from the said letter dated March 6, 2025, that the respondent authorities are sitting on his application from 2024 onwards and till date, his application has neither been allowed nor has the same been rejected. He, accordingly, prays for orders in terms of his prayers in the present writ petition. 13. Learned advocate representing the respondents does not deny the factual submissions made by the learned advocate of the petitioner. 14. Having heard the parties, I am of the view that the writ petitioner is entitled, in law to have his application decided one way or the other. 15. Accordingly, the respondent authorities are directed to dispose of the application dated January 22, 2024, filed by the petitioner before the Superintendent of Excise, Birbhum within a period of five weeks from the date of communication of this order. The respondent authorities are directed to pass a reasoned order in accordance with law and intimate the same to the petitioner. 16. Since no affidavit in opposition has been called for, the allegations made in the writ petition are deemed not to have been admitted by the respondents. 5 17. The writ petition is disposed of. 18. There will be no order as to costs. 19. All parties shall act in terms of server copy of the order downloaded from the official website of this Court. 20. Urgent photostat certified copy of this order, if applied for, be supplied expeditiously after compliance with all the necessary formalities. (Rishad Medora, J.)