HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA CONSTITUTIONAL WRIT JURISDICTION Present: THE HON’BLE JUSTICE JAY SENGUPTA WPA 27139 of 2026 Selim Akter and others Versus The State of West Bengal & Ors. For the petitioners Mr. Robiul Islam Mr. Jayed Hossain Mr. M Rahaman For the State Mr. Suman Chattopadhyay Mr. Abhiraj Tarafdar Heard on 29.09.2026 Judgment on 29.09.2026 JAY SENGUPTA, J: This is an application praying for direction upon the respondent authorities, especially the prescribed authority and the Block Development Officer, Tamluk Block to hold a meeting for removal of the Upa-Pradhan immediately with the help of adequate police force. 2 Affidavit of service filed in Court is taken on record Report filed by the State is also taken on record. Despite service no one appears on behalf of the private respondent although the State is represented. Learned counsel representing the petitioners submits that the petitioners are the elected members of 11 No. Madhurkul Gram Panchayat under Domkal Block in the year 2023. The petitioners have lost their confidence in the Upa-Pradhan. They made a requisition notice dated 24.08.2026 to the prescribed authority in this regard and the authority received the same on 27.08.2026. The requisition was also sent by registered post as per the provisions. However, the prescribed authority acted illegally in not holding the meeting for removal of the Upa- Pradhan on the ground of safety and security. On 08.09.2026, the date fixed for meeting of motion, the Prescribed Authority issued a letter postponing the meeting as the police was unable to deploy force. The period for considering the issue would expire soon. Reliance is placed on a decision of the Division Bench of this Court in MAT 992 of 2022 passed on 15.07.2022 whereby the Court directed the meeting to be held with necessary police protection within an extended time. Learned counsel for the State opposes the prayer and submits that the police authority could not provide necessary 3 protection for the meeting to be held. However, if further time is fixed by this Court, necessary arrangement may be made for police protection for the meeting to be held. It appears that in a similar case where the meeting had to be adjourned once, the Division Bench of this Court in MAT 992 of 2022 had directed the meeting to be held within an extended time with necessary police protection. In view of the above and in the interest of justice, the writ petition is disposed of by directing the respondent No.3 to convene a meeting for removal of the Upa-Pradhan within a period of ten days from this date after arranging for necessary police protection for holding of such meeting. Local police authorities would render all necessary help in this regard. The Superintendent of Police, Murshidabad shall take necessary steps to ensure the safety and security of the participants on the date that may be fixed by the prescribed authority. Urgent certified copy of this order, if applied for, be supplied to the parties upon compliance of all requisite formalities. (Jay Sengupta, J) 24/SG 4