10/09 2026 AD/42/18 266312 NANDY (DO) In the High Court at Calcutta Constitutional Writ Jurisdiction Appellate Side WPA/9784/2025 DIPANKAR SAMANTA VS BANGIYA GRAMIN VIKASH BANK & ORS. Mr. A. Chakraborty, Advocate Mr. Deepeshg Sharma, Advocate Mr. Suman Adhikari, Advocate ……for the Petitioner Ms. Sreemoyee Mitra, Advocate ……for the Gramin Bank 1. The petitioner is aggrieved that his application for condonation of delay in preferring the appeal has not been considered. The appeal has also been kept pending by respondent no. 3, since 2025. 2. Without going into the merits of the case, I direct respondent no. 3 to hear the application for condonation and dispose of the same by September 30, 2026 upon giving a hearing to the petitioner. 3. If the finding in the application is in favor of the petitioner, respondent no. 3 will proceed to hear the appeal on its merits. However, if the application does not find favor and is rejected, the question of hearing out the appeal does not arise. 4. Respondent no. 3 will also consider the question of disbursement of the gratuity and other retiral benefits to the petitioner in accordance with the provisions of law. 5. With the afore-stated directions, the writ petition is disposed of. No order as to costs. (Reetobroto Kumar Mitra, J.) P a g e | 2