40 07.09.2026 sayandeep Ct.9. CALCUTTA HIGH COURT IN THE CIRCUIT BENCH AT JALPAIGURI APPELLATE SIDE WPA 1610 of 2026 Utpal Guha Versus The State of West Bengal & anr. Mr. Anirban Banerjee … For the petitioner. Mr. Kunaljit Bhattacharjee, Ld.AGP Mr. Samar Rakshit … For State. 1. The affidavit-of-service filed in Court today is taken on record. 2. The instant writ petition has been filed before this Court since according to the petitioner, the State Administrative Tribunal is non-functional. 3. The learned advocate for State does not dispute the same. 4. In the aforesaid peculiar facts, in absence of the State Administrative Tribunal functioning this matter is taken up for consideration. The instant writ petitioner has been filed for a direction upon the respondents to consider the representation dated 24th June, 2026 and issue an order for disbursal of promotional benefits to the petitioner with retrospective effect from 23rd April, 2006, and for corresponding promotional benefit with 2 consequential pay fixation with effect from 23rd April, 2016 on completion of stipulated period of service as Savings Development Officer from the due date of 23rd April, 2006. 5. Having heard the learned advocates appearing for the respective parties, I find that the petitioner was initially appointed to the post of Grade I clerk-cum- Typist in pre-revised scale of 4,000-125-4250-150- 5300-175-7050-200-8850 on 7th April, 2005. As per the case made out, in terms of the recruitment rule dated 13th July, 1979, the petitioner was entitled to the promotion to the post of Savings Development Officer after completion of eight years of continuous and satisfactory service in the department and as such was entitled to promotion on 23rd April, 2006. Though, from time to time he had made diverse representations, ultimately, the above promotion was accorded only on 5th August, 2016. It is the petitioner’s contention that the petitioner is entitled to the promotional benefits. Accordingly a representation has already been made by the petitioner which has been received by the department on 17th December, 2018. Notwithstanding, such representation and the subsequent representation made by the petitioner on 24th June, 2026, no steps have been taken by the respondents. In the peculiar facts, the petitioner has approached this Court. 6. The respondents are represented. 3 7. Having heard the learned advocates appearing for the respective parties, I am of the view that in the light of the peculiar facts, the respondents must consider the petitioner’s representation and dispose of the same by passing a reasoned order upon affording an opportunity of hearing, in accordance with law. 8. It is expected that the decision in this regard shall be taken by the respondent No. 2 on an expeditious basis preferably within a period of eight weeks from the date of communication of this order. It is further made clear that if the petitioner is otherwise entitled to the benefits, the same shall be made available to the petitioner. 9. With the above observations and directions, the writ petition is disposed of. (Raja Basu Chowdhury, J.)