27.03.2026 Item No.15 Ct. No.1 KS W.P.A. (P) 123 of 2026 Md. Khalilur Rahaman Vs. The State of West Bengal & Ors. Mr. Ramkrishna Bhattacharya, Mr. Kaushik Chowdhury ….. For the Petitioner Mr. Swapan Kr. Dutta, Ld. G.P. Mr. Nilotpal Chatterjee Mr. Kanak Kiran Bandyopadhyay …..For the State DICTATED BY PARTHA SARATHI SEN, J.: 1. Affidavit-of-Service filed on behalf of the petitioner in Court, is taken on record. 2. The writ petitioner and the respondent/State are represented by their respective learned counsels. 3. By filing the instant writ petition, the writ petitioner has prayed for issuance of appropriate Writ/Writs against the respondent authorities, more specifically, the respondent no.6 authority commanding him to consider the representation dated 07.01.2026 (Annexure P/3 of the instant writ petition), in accordance with law. 2 4. At the time of hearing, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the writ petitioner, at the very outset, draws our attention to page nos.25 to 100 of the instant writ petition, being a list of 377 persons, who obtained AWAS-ID in Jaingoan Gram Panchayat under Goalpokher – 1 Development Block, District – Uttar Dinajpur. 5. It is submitted that that writ petitioner, who is the Panchayat Pradhan of Jaingoan Gram Panchayat under Goalpokher – 1 Development Block, District – Uttar Dinajpur is really concerned for non-receipt of the benefit of the said Yojana of the aforementioned 377 persons, who though got AWAS – ID, but as on this day, the said 377 persons did not get any benefit of the said Yojana. It is submitted that despite submission of such representation dated 07.01.2026 with the respondent authorities, no action has been taken by the said respondent authorities. 6. Mr. Nilotpal Chatterjee, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondent/State, in 3 his usual fairness, submits before this Court that the respondent no.6 authority may be directed to consider the representation dated 07.01.2026, as submitted by the writ petitioner, in accordance with law. 7. On careful perusal of the entire materials, as placed before us and after hearing the learned counsel for the contending parties, it appears that the writ petitioner by filing the instant writ petitioner has raised his concern regarding a public issue, which needs to be addressed at the earliest. 8. In view of such, we while disposing of the instant writ petition, directs the respondent no.6 authority to consider the representation dated 07.01.2026 of the writ petitioner, as submitted with him, in accordance with law and after giving an opportunity of hearing to the writ petitioner and/or any other stake holders shall pass a reasoned order and shall forthwith communicate the same to the writ 4 petitioner and/or any other stake holders, if there be any. 9. The entire exercise, as indicated in the foregoing paragraphs, is to be completed by the respondent no.6 authority within 90 working days from the date of communication of the server copy of this order. 10. The time-limit, as fixed by this Court, is peremptory and mandatory. 11. The respondent no.6 authority is further directed to take all consequential action forthwith, in the event, he finds sufficient merit in the representation dated 07.01.2026 while passing the reasoned order. 12. Before parting with, it is, however, made clear that while disposing the instant writ petition, we have not gone into the merits of the representation dated 07.01.2026 and thus, all points are kept open for adjudication by the respondent no.6 authority. 13. Liberty is also given to the learned advocate on record for the petitioner to communicate the 5 server copy of this order to the respondent no.6 authority, who is directed to act, in accordance with law. 14. With the aforesaid observation, writ petition stands disposed of. 15. Urgent photostat certified copy of this order, if applied for, be furnished to the parties expeditiously upon compliance of all legal formalities. (SUJOY PAUL, CJ.) (PARTHA SARATHI SEN, J.)