Research › Search › Judgment

Calcutta High Court · body

2026 DAILYLAW 38804 (CAL)

KAJAL CHOUBEY v. STATE OF WEST BENGAL AND ORS.

WPA/23847/2026 · 2026-09-09

Reetobroto Kumar Mitra

body2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

09.09.2026 16 sdas WPA 23847 of 2026 Sri Kajal Choubey Vs. The State of West Bengal & Ors. Mr. Goutam Pathak Banerjee Mr. Manujendra Narayan Roy Mr. Gourav Haldar ….. for the petitioner Mr. Piush Chaturvedi, Sr. Adv. Mr. Anujit Mookherji ….. for the State Mrs. Amita Gaur Mr. Soumen Chatterjee ….. for the respondent no. 4 1. Let affidavit-of-service, as filed in Court, be kept on record. 2. The petitioner is aggrieved with a proceeding under the Sexual Harassment of Women at Workplace (Prevention, Prohibition and Redressal) Act, 2013 (hereinafter referred to as the POSH Act, 2013) on several grounds including the procedural infirmity of such proceeding. 3. Mr. Chaturvedi, learned senior Advocate appearing on behalf of the State, submits that the writ petition should not be entertained at this stage, since the findings of the Enquiry Committee under the POSH Act, 2013 has been challenged in a 2 proceeding pending before the West Bengal State Administrative Tribunal being OA No. 79 of 2026. 4. In view of the decision of the Hon’ble Division Bench being WPST 209 of 2025 with WPST 210 of 2025 (Anindya Sundar Das vs. The State of West Bengal & Ors.), this writ petition cannot be entertained as the application pending before the West Bengal State Administrative Tribunal is on the selfsame cause of action. 5. At this juncture, Mr. Roy, learned Advocate appearing on behalf of the petitioner, prays for leave to withdraw the writ petition. 6. Such leave is granted. 7. Accordingly, the writ petition is dismissed as withdrawn. 8. Petitioner is at liberty to take appropriate steps to pursue his remedies. (Reetobroto Kumar Mitra, J.)