07/09 2026 A/39/18 266312 NANDY (DO) In the High Court at Calcutta Constitutional Writ Jurisdiction Appellate Side WPA/18928/2025 TAPAS MONDAL VS UNION OF INDIA & ORS. Mr. Sarwar Jahan, Advocate Mr. Mahendranath Sarkar, Advocate Mr. Anisur Rahman, Advocate Ms. Shalini Sen, Advocate Ms. Sahina Parvin, Advocate Mr. Aritra Ranjan Dutta Roy, Advocate ……for the Petitioner Mr. Moti Sagar Tiwari, Advocate Mr. Rishav Kumar Thakur, Advocate ……for the Union of India Mr. Devajyoti Barman, Advocate Ms. Sanjukta Basu Mallick, Advocate ……for the FCI 1. The petitioner is granted leave to correct the typographical error in paragraphs 2 and 3 of the writ-petition. 2. The petitioner had applied for compassionate appointment on the death of his father. The application was made some time back and, according to Mr. Barman, learned Advocate for the respondent authority, has been duly considered in accordance with law. The petitioner has, however, not been intimated of such consideration. 3. Mr. Barman submits that such intimation will be given within a period of two weeks from date as to whether the petitioner is entitled to compassionate appointment or not. 4. I make it clear that there will be no equity or right created in favour of the petitioner by virtue of this order. P a g e | 2 5. With the afore-stated directions, this writ- petition is disposed of. No order as to costs. 6. Urgent Photostat Certified Copy of this order, be given to the parties, if applied for, on priority basis. (Reetobroto Kumar Mitra, J.)